A few thoughts about the future of this planet
-
@stinkie said:
From Reuters ... Again: one cannot make this up.
I'm glad you're paying attention. I just wish more people in the US were actually paying attention. Still coming to grips with just how "low-information" many voters here are. (And they "elected" the lowest information bobble-head possible!) If they are paying this little attention to what these sorts of political activities mean, you can imagine how little they care about the future of the planet.
-
Unless there is some cosmic event (which we cannot prevent, anyway), I doubt the Earth will become uninhabitable in 100 years, or the extinction of the human race is nigh. In it's long history the Earth has already seen 5-20 (depending on how you define them) mass extinction events, and yet life found a way to continue. Two completely different catastrophes illustrate the tenaciousness of Mother Nature; after the eruption of Mt. St. Helens in 1980, and the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident, scientists discovered returning life much sooner than expected. And homo sapiens have shown themselves to be most adaptable.
-
I agree Daniel, except this extinction underway is one of our own making, that we might help slow if not prevent. Life is by it's nature persevering, and yet, though we may be "survive" for a while longer, what sort of world do we want for our progeny, and how hard will that survival be?
-
@andybot said:
I'm glad you're paying attention.
It's rather hard not to, given the the utter weirdness of the events unfolding right now. The US president attacked the judicial branch for ... doing its job. Worse still, he said (paraphrasing): if terrorists strike, folks, hold the judges responsible. That is ... breathtaking. One wonders if the man is utterly incompetent, and unaware of the importance of the trias politica, or if he's a full-blown fascist. (My guess is: the first, with equal dashes of narcissism and vulgarity thrown in the mix.)
And then there's the people Trump surrounds himself with. Kellyanne Conway? 'The Bowling Green Massacre' -really? Oops, sorry, she misspoke. (She bloody well didn't.) Go buy Ivanka's stuff, people! Ethics? Nah, no need for those.
How, just how, is this band of dunces, bigots and nutcases going to deal with international crises? And just imagine a 9/11-like event happening -with Stephen Bannon having Donald the Fickle's ear.
-
@stinkie said:
And then there's the people Trump surrounds himself with.
Flynn's out. He lied about a phone call with the Russian ambassador. Get this: the Justice Department had informed the White House about said phone call and lying in ... January.
Apparently, the White House didn't think it necessary to take action until the story went public.
Also: members of Trump's campaign "had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials." (The New York Times)
So, what have we got?
- contacts aplenty with the Russians
- a commander-in-chief who, oddly, kept prasing Vlad the Wannabe Impaler during his campaign
- non-released tax returns
- Russia meddling in the elections
Hmm ...
Before I forget: Mar-a-Lago membership fees have doubled to $200,000 following Trump's election. That alone should get people thinking, I feel.
-
@stinkie said:
Before I forget: Mar-a-Lago membership fees have doubled to $200,000 following Trump's election. That alone should get people thinking, I feel.
Plenty of people are thinking (and fuming) but the ones with power to do anything (controlling party in Congress) are perfectly happy sitting on their hands. (Or going after the real culprits: Sid the Science Kid)
-
Yeah ... currently the GOP's looking the other way. That won't last, though. It's just a matter of time before Trump becomes a liability to the Republicans, rather than an asset.
€50 says Trump won't be president for 4 years.
-
@stinkie said:
:lol:
Yeah ... currently the GOP's looking the other way. That won't last, though. It's just a matter of time before Trump becomes a liability to the Republicans, rather than an asset.
€50 says Trump won't be president for 4 years.
No way I'll take that bet.
With all the attention on how intertwined the Trump campaign was with Russia I fear they will either create a false flag or start a war in order to distract attention.
-
That won't fly this time around, I think. The whole world is keeping eyes on the White House like never before.
I raise the stakes to € 500.000. Plus my house! And the kid.
-
@stinkie said:
That won't fly this time around, I think. The whole world is keeping eyes on the White House like never before.
I raise the stakes to € 500.000. Plus my house! And the kid.
lol,I cannot match that bet even if I wanted to take it, also I'm done with kids, they finally out the house.
Stay tuned to what a Trump and Netanyahu can start, I believe Iran is the distraction they are after.
-
I can only hope they're not that stupid/irresponsible. A war with Iran would be disastrous.
One would almost feel nostalgic for the Decider.
-
More concerned with the Kims and their stupidity. They keep pushing like a teenager wanting to be up to all sorts without limit. THIS will be the crunch point as the US and PRC will be pushed into some kind of strike. Soon.
-
@mike amos said:
More concerned with the Kims and their stupidity. They keep pushing like a teenager wanting to be up to all sorts without limit. THIS will be the crunch point as the US and PRC will be pushed into some kind of strike. Soon.
I just saw that Kim Jong-un's half-brother (Kim Jong-nam) has been murdered, suspiciously utelizing typical North Korean methods.
-
I read that Trump should have told Flynn to apologise and Pence to shut up! He did neither! Its only a matter of time now before the Deep State have him up for impeachment.
As one prominent US commentator said, the only way for the US people to take back control of government is via revolution! I feel he might well be correct in his assessment as the military / security industrial complex is not likely to forfeit their $T budget any time soon.
-
The USAF is pushing for another seven fighter squadrons and the US navy is only able to complete deployments by stripping returning ships of spare parts. The issue of refits for surface ships and submarines is dire with refits delayed by years which then pushes these refit costs skyward. This cannot continue but the defence contractors and procurement divisions have wasted trillions of dollars already. Just like our governments make waste to make profits and nice little earners for senior management. Did anyone hear of the B-52 that lost an engine in flight? http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a24627/engine-falls-off-b-52-bomber-in-flight/ .
I actually think the Trumpster got the military angle right, too much waste of money that SHOULD go to other recipient purposes but I agree with Mike, the military senior brass and the defence contractors will be looking to take Trumpster down as soon as they can.
To those who think things should go back to the pre Trump ways, a weak US is a bad thing for all concerned as a insular US will not only remove a defence backbone from NATO, it will leave Europe vulnerable too, seeing that we are leaving the EU and the rest do not pay their way in defence terms. If you look at the subsidies given to the defence companies in the rest of europe, why is it that the UK alone abides by the EU which states these companies should NOT be subsidised? Why is it that the french government shored up the french car companies against an EU ruling, and got away with it? The UK would not be given that opportunity. Rover is NOT the only UK car company to go down the swannee river. -
@mike amos said:
To those who think things should go back to the pre Trump ways, a weak US is a bad thing for all concerned as a insular US will not only remove a defence backbone from NATO, it will leave Europe vulnerable too, seeing that we are leaving the EU and the rest do not pay their way in defence terms.
I don't think Trump intended to make the USA insular. Did he not say that he wanted to make it more of a trading nation rather than a military force or words along these lines?
Maybe I am naive, but since the break up of the USSR was there a need for NATO? From my reading the USSR was broken trying to keep up a military budget that matched the USA. They couldn't and this is why things went pear shaped for them. This now appears to be happening to the USA with its $20T budget black hole only backed by the Petro Dollar which they will defend until the last and have been doing over the past 20 years.
The USA needs to get out of the downward spiral that they were placed in by Tricky Dickie and Henry K and get back to basics, which they are very good at!
The so called reasoning for NATO, from what I can see, is that it was put in place to counter the communist threat but Stalin got rid of the communist branch that wanted total global communism and seemed to be content with the USSR's size as it was.
Again, the EU was mainly set up to keep peace between Germany and France also England to some extent. This objective is now obsolete! The Common Market trading arrangement (EEC) worked well but the idea of a United States of Europe is a non-runner and we are now seeing this to be the case.
@mike amos said:
If you look at the subsidies given to the defence companies in the rest of europe, why is it that the UK alone abides by the EU which states these companies should NOT be subsidised? Why is it that the french government shored up the french car companies against an EU ruling, and got away with it? The UK would not be given that opportunity. Rover is NOT the only UK car company to go down the swannee river.
The UK should never have agreed to more than EEC membership. That would have been enough for them to continue as a productive country. However when these self preservationist politicians get involved, they do what they do best, create more power for themselves and their masters, not their constituents.
The quicker the Sheeple wake up and embrace Direct Democracy the better things will be for all. Oh!, not all, the Globalist Masters wouldn't be happy .... too bad about that! They will have to make a living of their own sweat like the rest of us!
-
I think you touched the main reason nothing's going to work, Mike. It's the entrenched military-industrial complex. Though our laws should prevent it, the profiteers run the government. They have armies of lawyers, lobbyists, and accountants and whole corporations to work 24/7 running over the rest of us. "We" (those who care <50% of the electorate, probably <25% of the total population --counting disenfranchised) vote, and might write our congressman or march on Saturday morning. There's no contest.
-
This too, one cannot make up.
The president of the US, arguably the most powerful man in the world, relies on Fox News for international intel.
-
Yeah, and no one here in Sweden knows what he is talking about.
This is what really happened in Sweden that night: http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/Vn17J
-
Advertisement