Trump is no dangerous udiot.

Discussion of current events
User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1143
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: All the best to Washington AND Beijing

Post by SteveFoerster » Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:48 am

Sertorio wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:26 am
America and Americans are, at heart, very much isolationists. Americans love to be loved, and when that is not forthcoming they tend to sulk and go back to their own business. Being big enough, economically strong enough and technologically and scientifically quite advanced, the US does not need to fear anything from the outside world. They can therefore afford to withdraw from world affairs. And they will love seeing us in Europe trying to cope on our own...
This belies a complete lack of understanding about American society. Americans were mostly isolationist until the second world war, but haven't been since. There are various schools of thought competing within American society as a whole on international matters, and while libertarians and some on the left are non-interventionist, and while populists are economically mercantilist, none are truly isolationist.
Sertorio wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:26 am
As to what concerns China, I don't think they would want to take over the US job of world policemen. The Chinese love to trade and would love to be very rich, but they will not be aggressive to achieve it. And while Christians and Muslims always seem to want to impose their faith on others, Confucians do not interfere with other people's beliefs. An important prerequisite for peace...
They may not care intrinsically, but being the world's policeman is a useful pretense for expanding one's sphere of influence, so particularly as their navy increases its blue water capabilities, they may be tempted to take on this role.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1142
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: All the best to Washington AND Beijing

Post by Sertorio » Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:00 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:48 am
Sertorio wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:26 am
America and Americans are, at heart, very much isolationists. Americans love to be loved, and when that is not forthcoming they tend to sulk and go back to their own business. Being big enough, economically strong enough and technologically and scientifically quite advanced, the US does not need to fear anything from the outside world. They can therefore afford to withdraw from world affairs. And they will love seeing us in Europe trying to cope on our own...
This belies a complete lack of understanding about American society. Americans were mostly isolationist until the second world war, but haven't been since. There are various schools of thought competing within American society as a whole on international matters, and while libertarians and some on the left are non-interventionist, and while populists are economically mercantilist, none are truly isolationist.
Sertorio wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:26 am
As to what concerns China, I don't think they would want to take over the US job of world policemen. The Chinese love to trade and would love to be very rich, but they will not be aggressive to achieve it. And while Christians and Muslims always seem to want to impose their faith on others, Confucians do not interfere with other people's beliefs. An important prerequisite for peace...
They may not care intrinsically, but being the world's policeman is a useful pretense for expanding one's sphere of influence, so particularly as their navy increases its blue water capabilities, they may be tempted to take on this role.
Thanks for your comments. We will have to wait and see...

neverfail
Posts: 1657
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: All the best to Washington AND Beijing

Post by neverfail » Fri Apr 06, 2018 5:19 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:48 am
Sertorio wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:26 am
America and Americans are, at heart, very much isolationists. Americans love to be loved, and when that is not forthcoming they tend to sulk and go back to their own business. Being big enough, economically strong enough and technologically and scientifically quite advanced, the US does not need to fear anything from the outside world. They can therefore afford to withdraw from world affairs. And they will love seeing us in Europe trying to cope on our own...
This belies a complete lack of understanding about American society. Americans were mostly isolationist until the second world war, but haven't been since. There are various schools of thought competing within American society as a whole on international matters, and while libertarians and some on the left are non-interventionist, and while populists are economically mercantilist, none are truly isolationist.
Sertorio wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:26 am
As to what concerns China, I don't think they would want to take over the US job of world policemen. The Chinese love to trade and would love to be very rich, but they will not be aggressive to achieve it. And while Christians and Muslims always seem to want to impose their faith on others, Confucians do not interfere with other people's beliefs. An important prerequisite for peace...
They may not care intrinsically, but being the world's policeman is a useful pretense for expanding one's sphere of influence, so particularly as their navy increases its blue water capabilities, they may be tempted to take on this role.
Steve, with my most sincere respects to both you and Sertorio: I do not believe that even Britain, the original "global policeman" back in the 19th century, particularly wanted the job but as it's seaborne international trade had grown beyond a critical mass size and importance, it had to assume this role in order to protect its oceanic logistics, overseas markets and sources of supply etc. Whilst the USA has never been as dependent on international trade as the US; I get the impression that your country, since Bretton Woods in 1944, has still deemed it as being in its own best interests to "step into Britain's old shoes" and become guarantor of last resort that the worlds trade routes shall remain open to all.

Global free trade only flows when there is a sufficiently strong (and benign) power structure in place to ensure global peace.

It is unfortunate that so few Americans have any sense of "connectedness" to international trade that they still assume that their country can be self-sufficient unto itself. Hence the leaning towards a regression back into pre-War isolationism.

Please think about this.

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1143
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: Trump is no dangerous udiot.

Post by SteveFoerster » Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:04 pm

The U.S. has always been a trading nation. The disastrous effects of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in 1930 and the decade the followed showed that the U.S. is as dependent on international trade as anyone, and that's only increased in the meantime.

But there's an enormous difference between frigates sailing around to ensure sea lanes are open, and maintaining military bases in 70 countries around the world, interfering in other countries in ways that would rightfully brand any other country as a rogue state.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1586
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Trump is no dangerous udiot.

Post by cassowary » Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:05 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:04 pm
The U.S. has always been a trading nation. The disastrous effects of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in 1930 and the decade the followed showed that the U.S. is as dependent on international trade as anyone, and that's only increased in the meantime.

But there's an enormous difference between frigates sailing around to ensure sea lanes are open, and maintaining military bases in 70 countries around the world, interfering in other countries in ways that would rightfully brand any other country as a rogue state.
Steve,

You fail to understand that many countries welcome the US presence. They view the US as a policeman. The bases are with the consent of the hosts. When the US presence is no longer needed, they can be sent home. Eg the Philippines told the US to leave and they left.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1142
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Trump is no dangerous udiot.

Post by Sertorio » Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:22 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:04 pm
The U.S. has always been a trading nation. The disastrous effects of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in 1930 and the decade the followed showed that the U.S. is as dependent on international trade as anyone, and that's only increased in the meantime.

But there's an enormous difference between frigates sailing around to ensure sea lanes are open, and maintaining military bases in 70 countries around the world, interfering in other countries in ways that would rightfully brand any other country as a rogue state.
The US doesn't want freedom of the seas. It wants control power over the rest of the world. All to protect the interests of a very small - but very powerful - oligarchy which wants to neutralize the state as a regulatory force and as a supplier of welfare, in order to weaken those who need to work - the labour force - and deny them participation in any productivity gains by keeping them highly vulnerable and their wages as low as possible. Which requires high unemployment, presently being fostered by streams of refugees and immigrants from poor countries. The privatization obsession of people like Theresa May and Macron are means to achieve those ends. And the Russiaphobia is a means to prevent the strengthening of powers capable of thwarting the oligarchy's policies. It's a new kind of class warfare, in which the "bourgeoisie" is now the global oligarchy, and the "proletarians" are everybody else. I'm afraid it will be a fight to the death, and we better be prepared to fight for our survival.

neverfail
Posts: 1657
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Trump is no dangerous udiot.

Post by neverfail » Sun Apr 08, 2018 12:04 am

cassowary wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:05 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:04 pm
The U.S. has always been a trading nation. The disastrous effects of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in 1930 and the decade the followed showed that the U.S. is as dependent on international trade as anyone, and that's only increased in the meantime.

But there's an enormous difference between frigates sailing around to ensure sea lanes are open, and maintaining military bases in 70 countries around the world, interfering in other countries in ways that would rightfully brand any other country as a rogue state.
Steve,

You fail to understand that many countries welcome the US presence. They view the US as a policeman. The bases are with the consent of the hosts. When the US presence is no longer needed, they can be sent home. Eg the Philippines told the US to leave and they left.
Cassowary, I can see and accept Steve's point. The US is undeniable a welcome presence on our part of the World but it does not follow that this is necessarily so everywhere.

You are correct in pointing out that the US left the Philippines when the Philippines government requested them to. But that may well in part because their bases there had outlived their usefulness. Especially so after formerly dormant mount Pinatubo erupted and buried their Clark air base under volcanic ash.

http://articles.latimes.com/1991-06-10/ ... k-air-base

I am aware of that event because my wife was at the time in the Philippines attending my brother-in-law's wedding.

I get the impression that the Pentagon at the time might have calculated that the cost of building a replacement elsewhere in the Philippines in a safer location was just too high.

With its source of air cover stripped away, the other US base in the Philippines, the naval station at Subic Bay must have been very much reduced in strategic value.
...........................................................................................................

By contrast, on Okinawa Island I believe that they would very much like to get rid of the American military and never see them again.

Unfortunately for the Okinawans (whose home island was devastated by the American invasion back in 1945) the post-War US occupation of Japan ended only in 1951. I get the impression that the yanks restored sovereign independence to Japan only with strings attached. Chief of these was that Japan had to allow the US to retain military bases on their soil.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1586
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Trump is no dangerous udiot.

Post by cassowary » Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:27 am

[quote=neverfail post_id=10785 time=1523171076 user_i
Cassowary, I can see and accept Steve's point. The US is undeniable a welcome presence on our part of the World but it does not follow that this is necessarily so everywhere.

You are correct in pointing out that the US left the Philippines when the Philippines government requested them to. But that may well in part because their bases there had outlived their usefulness. Especially so after formerly dormant mount Pinatubo erupted and buried their Clark air base under volcanic ash.

http://articles.latimes.com/1991-06-10/ ... k-air-base

I am aware of that event because my wife was at the time in the Philippines attending my brother-in-law's wedding.

I get the impression that the Pentagon at the time might have calculated that the cost of building a replacement elsewhere in the Philippines in a safer location was just too high.

With its source of air cover stripped away, the other US base in the Philippines, the naval station at Subic Bay must have been very much reduced in strategic value.
...........................................................................................................

By contrast, on Okinawa Island I believe that they would very much like to get rid of the American military and never see them again.

Unfortunately for the Okinawans (whose home island was devastated by the American invasion back in 1945) the post-War US occupation of Japan ended only in 1951. I get the impression that the yanks restored sovereign independence to Japan only with strings attached. Chief of these was that Japan had to allow the US to retain military bases on their soil.
[/quote]

Neverfail,

My recollection is that the US would liked to remain in the Philippines but the Filipinos were adamant that they leave.

I don't think that cost of cleaning up volcanic ash is much. As for Okinawan base, Japan is a sovereign nation. It can ask the Americans to leave anytime.

But they prefer the Americans to stay. They fear China, Russia and North Korea. The Europeans were in a panic when Trump suggested he may not want to honor US obligations to defend them from Russia. So US troops are also welcome there.

These ate the major deployments. Can you think of a deployment that they are not welcomed?

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1142
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Trump is no dangerous udiot.

Post by Sertorio » Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:49 am

cassowary wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:27 am
The Europeans were in a panic when Trump suggested he may not want to honor US obligations to defend them from Russia. So US troops are also welcome there.
I must have been somewhere else, because I did not see any panic in Europe on that account. The vassals of the US in Europe (some of our governments) may have been concerned about the possibility of US troops leaving Europe, but people in general would be only too happy to see them go. And those who still have some illusions on that account will soon change their minds, when they see the US trying to drag us into a war with Russia...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1586
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Trump is no dangerous udiot.

Post by cassowary » Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:14 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:49 am
cassowary wrote:
Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:27 am
The Europeans were in a panic when Trump suggested he may not want to honor US obligations to defend them from Russia. So US troops are also welcome there.
I must have been somewhere else, because I did not see any panic in Europe on that account. The vassals of the US in Europe (some of our governments) may have been concerned about the possibility of US troops leaving Europe, but people in general would be only too happy to see them go. And those who still have some illusions on that account will soon change their minds, when they see the US trying to drag us into a war with Russia...
How many % of Europeans want US to withdraw its troops and protection from Europe? Any polls?

Post Reply