According to a recent study by the Pentagon-linked RAND Corporation, a US military conflict with China is unlikely by calculated move but less unlikely by miscalculation or accident. Does this not mean US interventionism in the South China Sea conflict could lead to such a nightmare scenario? Just this year the US has pushed both Vietnam and the Philippines to a more confrontational position vis-a-vis China. What if this brinkmanship and ally-shopping leads to a Chinese miscalculation? Looking at the scenarios in today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:
Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.
Why not endorse Trump? He clearly wants a rapprochement with Russia and China. That is the road to getting rid of the threat of nuclear war.
Survival comes first. Killary is likely to get us into a war with Russia and/or China.
“Why not endorse Trump?”
Because whatever else Ron Paul might be, one thing he isn’t is batshit insane.
To my ears your comment sounds pretty non-substantive. Walsh makes a point. I think his point is half wrong as I haven’t heard any rapprochement with China talk come from Trump but it is a point.
You have an opportunity. You can do better than calling Trump insane. I find that disappointing.
I didn’t call Trump insane.
I called Ron Paul not insane.
There’s a difference.
Did I hear an echo of the NYT?
Sounds a lot like a HRC endorsement 2 me…. And actually Hillary with the witches laugh, and the casual attitude about games of thermonuclear chicken with Russia/China seems the batshit insane candidate no.1. Am I the only 1 who isn’t gleefully on board for HRC and VJN’s games of chance that could get a couple of hundred million souls vaporized…???
USA, Inc. has been about building Empire from Day 1. Most Americans are proud of their Empire.
And if a few eggs need to be broken…
The US “bought” huge amounts of land but from the wrong people. Enforced at tax-subsidized gunpoint. Which is a big not sell point about Trump. He’s a real estate mogul, and his silver spoon came from his daddy selling already subsidized land to the Military. Some things set me off more easily than others.
The Louisiana Purchase paid money to a foreign King who had never seen America and also had paid nothing to the Native owners.
Nor did the Spanish. The Dutch paid $24 dollars worth of beads for Manhattan Island, big whoop.
Every square inch of American soil was taken at gunpoint. That’s an easy equation.
Would Trump actually be able to balance what his disciples keep proclaiming, that he’ll close the borders and break down international trade, and expel all persons of the Muslim faith while and at the same time make all nice with China, uphold the constitution and just exactly how much power does he think he would have? His followers credit him with Godlike powers, and are bound to be disappointed one way or the other.
It wouldn’t matter at all if he believes it personally.
Hillary the same way. We’ll be lucky to scrape past without a civil war. Clinton is also running on the English Manifest Destiny /slash/ Exceptionalism /slash/ Dominionism crap that Donald’s fan club ascribe to him. She’s just more subtle about it.
AIM had a candidate, Leonard Peltier, who is in Federal Prison. And they’re currently not giving him real health care, no surprise, and is in really bad health. There are others.
Would Trump actually be able to…’
In a word, no. His supporters are caught up in the ‘Hope and Change’ B.S. exactly the same as the Obama supporters were.
Clinton supporters are essentially looking for an Obama third term.
“Regrettably in the last few days it looks like it will be very difficult for Trump to win.”
Take a look at:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/148740944816/trump-prediction-update
Scott Adams of Dilbert has some very interesting cases to make on people, politics and persuasion.
Anyone but rabid Neocons
My prediction at the moment is that Trump will carry every state Romney carried, plus Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida for, IIRC, 289 electoral votes. He may carry several of those states with a plurality rather than a majority, but he’s still probably going to the White House.
To absorb the Scott Adams of Dilbert post you must actually read (not scan) more than the first sentence.
I strongly believe it is worth the time for you to do so.
Pre-election polls are worth considering but real people voting for candidate X or Y are not the same as people that respond to polls (in each and every case).
Thank you for all your words in whatever forum they occur.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/148740944816/trump-prediction-update
I read the whole thing – perhaps with insufficient care . It makes good points as well as dubious ones.
It is very hard for us humans to be right based only on argumentation, no matter how brilliant – and harder still to tell which arguments are correct. That is why we have exoeriments in science – and polls in elections, which of course are much weaker but the best we poor creatures can do right now.