Home

Political pressure works!
Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  Last >>
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News

Report offensive ad

View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Squishy









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 2:47 pm
Miri7 wrote:
I can't get behind anyone who uses forcibly removing babies, toddlers, children from the arms of their mothers (who have only committed a misdemeanor) as part of a "brilliant strategy".

That is cruel and immoral. We don't use helpless innocent children as political pawns. We don't inflict suffering on the most vulnerable to score political wins. To me, that is against Torah values.

Religious groups across the spectrum have denounced this policy, and it makes me sick to see how glibly some of my fellow frum Jews treat this sad chapter in American history.


Then you better move because they do not let children in jail with their mothers who commit crimes. Those children are also forcibly removed when the parents resist. You better believe this happens.
Back to top

Squishy









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 2:50 pm
rgr wrote:
Can you clarify what you meant here please


Trump is brilliant does not need clarification. The fact he is The President shows he is a brilliant strategist. He has a clear handle on how to benefit Americans. He is a winner. I would like to see what the other side gives before I see whether it was Trump's political pressure that worked or the left and the media's political pressure that worked.

People need to have faith in Trump. He agitated North Korea's "rocket man" and said his button is bigger and works. He deserves the talked about Nobel.
Back to top

camp









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 2:51 pm
Fox, you’re brilliant as usual!
Back to top

Squishy









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 2:54 pm
camp wrote:
I voted for Trump because of his commitment to Israel.
Because only he, would hire the greatest women in our country Nikki Haley.
Because the economy is booming.
Because he is the first president who kept his word about moving our embassy to our beloved Yerushalayim.
Because he’s a man of justice and freed Rubashkin and others so wrongly jailed.
Because although I am a proud American, I’m First and foremost a Jew. His policies have our back (unlike the Arafat hugger or Farrakhan lover).
Because he has seichel and is trying to fix a very complicated immigration situation that Obama got us into.
Because he is human and admits it, unlike the arrogance of Obama and Hillary.
Thank you president Trump! Keep America great in 2020!


Just wanted to add to your list my applause for the US leaving UN Human Rights Council because of its bias against Isreal. He knows how to stand with his allies.
Back to top

SixOfWands









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 2:55 pm
Fox wrote:
Sigh.

No, I voted for him because he's not wedded to ideology. If something isn't working, he stops doing it.

Trump didn't create the crisis. Breitbart was reporting on it back in 2014. Of course, Rachel Maddow wasn't moved to tears back then. Apparently those babies weren't crying as loudly then . . . because . . . Breitbart!

Now can we talk about the 10K unaccompanied kids and what should be done with them? Because so far, I haven't heard a single idea.


Children were not being removed from their parents in 2014. That's a lie, plain and simple. Trump created this crisis in April, then blamed it on the Democrats. Now he wants to be a hero for reversing his own policy. If he actually does.

Yes, children who attempted to cross the border illegally were held in 2014. Because Obama did not advocate for or allow open borders. And yes, there was an objection to conditions. And they were ordered to be changed. Check out the NY Times editorials on the issues.
Back to top

southernbubby









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:01 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
Children were not being removed from their parents in 2014. That's a lie, plain and simple. Trump created this crisis in April, then blamed it on the Democrats. Now he wants to be a hero for reversing his own policy. If he actually does.

Yes, children who attempted to cross the border illegally were held in 2014. Because Obama did not advocate for or allow open borders. And yes, there was an objection to conditions. And they were ordered to be changed. Check out the NY Times editorials on the issues.


Children were removed if it was in their best interest.
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:05 pm
Miri7 wrote:
I can't get behind anyone who uses forcibly removing babies, toddlers, children from the arms of their mothers (who have only committed a misdemeanor) as part of a "brilliant strategy".

That is cruel and immoral. We don't use helpless innocent children as political pawns. We don't inflict suffering on the most vulnerable to score political wins. To me, that is against Torah values.

Religious groups across the spectrum have denounced this policy, and it makes me sick to see how glibly some of my fellow frum Jews treat this sad chapter in American history.

That's great. No one is truly in favor of ripping infants away from their mothers.

Now, what about separating 12-year-old girls from their "aunties" who bring them to work in brothels?

Does that count as separating families or not?

Human Trafficking Search
Back to top

SixOfWands









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:05 pm
Squishy wrote:
Trump is brilliant does not need clarification. The fact he is The President shows he is a brilliant strategist. He has a clear handle on how to benefit Americans. He is a winner. I would like to see what the other side gives before I see whether it was Trump's political pressure that worked or the left and the media's political pressure that worked.

People need to have faith in Trump. He agitated North Korea's "rocket man" and said his button is bigger and works. He deserves the talked about Nobel.


Yes, I'm impressed by the verification procedures that Trump put in place to ensure that Kim actually denuclearizes. After all, Trump pulled us out of the Iran deal because those verification weren't sufficient. But the ones he put in place with North Korea ... ummm, can you explain them to me again?

And after all, its not like North Korea ever made this promise before. Except:

What: Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons
When: December 12, 1985
What happened? North Korea signs onto this landmark treaty—190 countries are currently members—but makes its membership contingent on the US withdrawing nuclear weapons from South Korea, which doesn’t happen for several years, buying North Korea time to build its nuclear capabilities.

What: Joint Declaration of the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula
When: January 20, 1992
What happened? North and South Korea sign an agreement that “the South and the North shall not test, manufacture, produce, receive, possess, store, deploy or use nuclear weapons.” In February of 1993, suspicion that North Korea is violating its commitments creates tension over inspections, leading to further delays.

What: Agreed Framework
When: October 21, 1994
What happened? North Korea promises to stop plutonium production in exchange for much-needed supplies. This mostly holds up until 2002, when the US discovers that North Korea has secretly been enriching uranium for nuclear weapons. By the end of that year, Kim Jong Il kicks out all international inspectors. On January 10, 2003, North Korea officially withdraws from the 1985 nonproliferation treaty.

What: Six-Party Talks
When: September 19, 2005
What happened? After several rounds of intense talks with South Korea, China, Japan, the US, and Russia, North Korea pledges to abandon “all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs.” The US and North Korea can’t agree on verification details, though, leading to increased hostilities.

What: Six-Party Talks (Again)
When: October 3, 2007
What happened? In a joint statement, North Korea agrees to declare all of its nuclear programs, shut down those affiliated with its weapons program, and not to transfer “nuclear materials, technology, or know-how.” Once again, stakeholders can’t agree on a verification process.

What: US Agreement
When: February 29, 2012
What happened? North Korea agrees to suspend nuclear tests and uranium enrichment, and said it will allow inspectors, in exchange for food aid. Two weeks later, North Korea announces plans to launch a satellite, which immediately unwinds the deal.

But its different this time, I'm sure.

I'll give Trump credit if it happens. But right now, I'm not impressed by what is little more than a "sure, yeah" agreement, and with Trump's praise of a brutal dictator.
Back to top

SixOfWands









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:05 pm
southernbubby wrote:
Children were removed if it was in their best interest.


Yes, that was the official policy.
Back to top

southernbubby









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:08 pm
Fox wrote:
That's great. No one is truly in favor of ripping infants away from their mothers.

Now, what about separating 12-year-old girls from their "aunties" who bring them to work in brothels?

Does that count as separating families or not?

Human Trafficking Search


The policy needs to be to do what is in the best interest of the child.
Back to top

southernbubby









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:13 pm
Squishy wrote:
Then you better move because they do not let children in jail with their mothers who commit crimes. Those children are also forcibly removed when the parents resist. You better believe this happens.



I agree that this is a huge problem for children, some of whom have nowhere to go except for foster care or a facility. Some mothers who give birth in prison and who have short sentences get to keep their babies with them. Other times, they lose custody immediately after birth.

The problem with the border separation is that reuniting the families comes with the challenge of finding each other.
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:16 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
Children were not being removed from their parents in 2014. That's a lie, plain and simple. Trump created this crisis in April, then blamed it on the Democrats. Now he wants to be a hero for reversing his own policy. If he actually does.

Yes, children who attempted to cross the border illegally were held in 2014. Because Obama did not advocate for or allow open borders. And yes, there was an objection to conditions. And they were ordered to be changed. Check out the NY Times editorials on the issues.


Huh! Everyone must not have received the memo!




Actually, the Obama administration even pursued a policy of trying to turn teenage illegal immigrants into informers against the cartels that had sent them. To their credit, this practice was ceased after the cartels began murdering the relatives of the youthful informers and/or firebombing their family homes.
Back to top

anon for this









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:23 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
Yes, I'm impressed by the verification procedures that Trump put in place to ensure that Kim actually denuclearizes. After all, Trump pulled us out of the Iran deal because those verification weren't sufficient. But the ones he put in place with North Korea ... ummm, can you explain them to me again?

And after all, its not like North Korea ever made this promise before. Except:

What: Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons
When: December 12, 1985
What happened? North Korea signs onto this landmark treaty—190 countries are currently members—but makes its membership contingent on the US withdrawing nuclear weapons from South Korea, which doesn’t happen for several years, buying North Korea time to build its nuclear capabilities.

What: Joint Declaration of the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula
When: January 20, 1992
What happened? North and South Korea sign an agreement that “the South and the North shall not test, manufacture, produce, receive, possess, store, deploy or use nuclear weapons.” In February of 1993, suspicion that North Korea is violating its commitments creates tension over inspections, leading to further delays.

What: Agreed Framework
When: October 21, 1994
What happened? North Korea promises to stop plutonium production in exchange for much-needed supplies. This mostly holds up until 2002, when the US discovers that North Korea has secretly been enriching uranium for nuclear weapons. By the end of that year, Kim Jong Il kicks out all international inspectors. On January 10, 2003, North Korea officially withdraws from the 1985 nonproliferation treaty.

What: Six-Party Talks
When: September 19, 2005
What happened? After several rounds of intense talks with South Korea, China, Japan, the US, and Russia, North Korea pledges to abandon “all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs.” The US and North Korea can’t agree on verification details, though, leading to increased hostilities.

What: Six-Party Talks (Again)
When: October 3, 2007
What happened? In a joint statement, North Korea agrees to declare all of its nuclear programs, shut down those affiliated with its weapons program, and not to transfer “nuclear materials, technology, or know-how.” Once again, stakeholders can’t agree on a verification process.

What: US Agreement
When: February 29, 2012
What happened? North Korea agrees to suspend nuclear tests and uranium enrichment, and said it will allow inspectors, in exchange for food aid. Two weeks later, North Korea announces plans to launch a satellite, which immediately unwinds the deal.

But its different this time, I'm sure.

I'll give Trump credit if it happens. But right now, I'm not impressed by what is little more than a "sure, yeah" agreement, and with Trump's praise of a brutal dictator.


As I understand it, the language in the latest agreement is even more vague about denuclearization than previous agreements were.

I agree that Trump meeting with Kim is a vast improvement over trading insults about the size of their "buttons" and whose "button" works better. Many experts believe that one of Kim's primary goals in pursuing nuclear weapons is a wish to be taken seriously by other world powers, and this summit, including Trump's praise, has given him just that. Still, this summit seems to have left us further from nuclear war with NK than we were during most of the Trump administration, which is good.

(When my children were younger, and created a mess, I praised them for attempting to clean it up. I never tried offering a Nobel Peace Prize; maybe that would have yielded better results).

I agree that if NK does denuclearize as a result of this summit, Trump would deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. However, even if NK were willing to denuclearize, it seems unlikely that they would consider the US a reliable treaty partner in light of the US withdrawal from the JCPOA.
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:24 pm
southernbubby wrote:
The policy needs to be to do what is in the best interest of the child.

Precisely, but people are making it sound like that's obvious. In the small percentage of cases where it is, I suspect there is no serious disagreement, which is why Trump is perfectly willing to concede the point.

But in a huge majority of cases, there is either no adult accompanying the minor at all, or if there is, it is unclear what the relationship is.

And sadly, we must be constantly aware of how coyotes and human traffickers will exploit any loophole or ambiguity. This is not about keeping people out of the country; this is about keeping very, very bad people from preying on others, often leaving them to die horribly in the desert.
Back to top

Deep









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:25 pm
Squishy wrote:
Just wanted to add to your list my applause for the US leaving UN Human Rights Council because of its bias against Isreal. He knows how to stand with his allies.


As a Canadian, I politely (and emphatically) disagree.
Back to top

SixOfWands









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:28 pm
Fox wrote:
Huh! Everyone must not have received the memo!




Actually, the Obama administration even pursued a policy of trying to turn teenage illegal immigrants into informers against the cartels that had sent them. To their credit, this practice was ceased after the cartels began murdering the relatives of the youthful informers and/or firebombing their family homes.


Wait. I thought you said there were no protests against Obama's immigration policies. Then you show me an image of a protest.

I guess that you agree with the old saw, consistency is the bugaboo of small minds.

By the way, the sign and the protest refers to deportation of undocumented alien parents, separating them from their citizen children. Try reading contemporaneous accounts in the mainstream media.
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:42 pm
anon for this wrote:
I agree that if NK does denuclearize as a result of this summit, Trump would deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. However, even if NK were willing to denuclearize, it seems unlikely that they would consider the US a reliable treaty partner in light of the US withdrawal from the JCPOA.

I suspect that Trump would make sure any agreement with NK went through Congress rather than the kinds of UN signatory process of the JCPOA. However, I agree that such an event is way, way down the road and talk about a Nobel prize is premature. Giving Obama one basically for getting elected dimmed the honor somewhat, anyway.

However, there's an element that "old East Asian hands" consider very important: the role of "face" in Korean (and East Asian) culture. The non-verbal language as well as some of the words used by Kim, et. al., suggest that he defers to Trump and looks to Trump for guidance. Trump, for his part, capitalizes on Kim's passive personality and his likely fear of the NK military rulers.

Since Trump has praised him publicly, Kim cannot renege easily without "losing face." However, if someone disrespects you publicly, you would "lose face" by kowtowing to their demands.

Kim loves videos, and most experts are guessing that Trump is Skyping with Kim regularly, using The Apprentice to convince Kim that Trump will coach him and help him end his subservience to the NK generals.
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:49 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
Wait. I thought you said there were no protests against Obama's immigration policies. Then you show me an image of a protest.

I guess that you agree with the old saw, consistency is the bugaboo of small minds.

By the way, the sign and the protest refers to deportation of undocumented alien parents, separating them from their citizen children. Try reading contemporaneous accounts in the mainstream media.

There were actually tons of images of protests, and the specific complaints were varied since the policies changed throughout Obama's administration.

I didn't say there were "no protests" by anyone. I said that the media ignored the issue.

Again, this underscores the point that multiple Presidents have grappled with the problems involved in immigration, families, and processing. The Obama administration solved the problem of family separation by choosing not to enforce the law. Good for infants and toddlers. Not so good for kids being sold to brothels. The Obama administration also tried immediately deporting family units, which immigration advocates protested. The Trump administration chose a zero-tolerance policy. Not so good for infants and toddlers; good for kids being sold to brothels.

My point is not necessarily that families should be separated; just that people are dramatically oversimplifying a problem and will then complain about the unintended consequences.
Back to top

anon for this









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:54 pm
Fox wrote:
I suspect that Trump would make sure any agreement with NK went through Congress rather than the kinds of UN signatory process of the JCPOA. However, I agree that such an event is way, way down the road and talk about a Nobel prize is premature. Giving Obama one basically for getting elected dimmed the honor somewhat, anyway.

However, there's an element that "old East Asian hands" consider very important: the role of "face" in Korean (and East Asian) culture. The non-verbal language as well as some of the words used by Kim, et. al., suggest that he defers to Trump and looks to Trump for guidance. Trump, for his part, capitalizes on Kim's passive personality and his likely fear of the NK military rulers.

Since Trump has praised him publicly, Kim cannot renege easily without "losing face." However, if someone disrespects you publicly, you would "lose face" by kowtowing to their demands.

Kim loves videos, and most experts are guessing that Trump is Skyping with Kim regularly, using The Apprentice to convince Kim that Trump will coach him and help him end his subservience to the NK generals.


I agree that Obama's Nobel Peace Prize was rather puzzling (Obama thought so too); I think that the committee hoped that he would start fewer wars than George W. Bush and was rewarding him for that in advance.

That's an interesting analysis, but this is the first time I've heard Kim described as passive. Also I'm pretty sure that South Korean leaders praised his father publicly during earlier summits but those didn't work out too well.
Back to top

Fox









  


Post  Wed, Jun 20 2018, 3:59 pm
Squishy wrote:
He knows how to stand with his allies.

Even better, he is forcing us to think carefully who are allies really are.

For decades, powerful voices in the U.S. have endlessly curried favor with nations that openly disdain us, criticizing us constantly while "allowing" us to pick up the tab for whatever costs money in the world. We've behaved like the poor country cousins, intimidated by countries with longer histories and older cultures.

Just like with actual friendships, sometimes you have to say, "You know, a real friend wouldn't behave this way" and let the friendship retire to the back burner, so to speak.
Back to top
Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  Last >> Recent Topics

Page 2 of 4 View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News

Similar Topics Replies Last Post
Political corruption at school?
by amother
13 Fri, Jun 17 2011, 1:40 am View last post
Political correctness...and women!!!
by technic
3 Sat, Oct 28 2006, 10:46 pm View last post
Son addicted to porn. Also, political contributions? 22 Fri, Oct 31 2008, 1:47 pm View last post
[ Poll ] Lack of Political Involvement and Its Repercussions
by amother
48 Tue, Jul 05 2016, 7:24 am View last post
Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners
by amother
3 Sun, Feb 28 2016, 9:14 am View last post

Jump to:  







Report offensive ad