New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#3076 2025-12-28 13:48:12
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,449
Re: Politics
SpaceNut,
Problem is the hard evidence is dismissed as being generated and not real.
Evidence is law of having sex with minors. That is a crime and documented.
There is no "hard evidence". The person making the accusation claimed to have such evidence, but then later said she lied about that and never had any such evidence. If such evidence does exit, giving a copy of it to the FBI would've been a great place to start.
Accusing someone of a crime is not "evidence" of anything. An accusation of a 20+ year old crime by someone who had their entire deposition thrown out after she later stated that "she made it all up to draw attention to the Epstein case", doesn't help prove anything in a court of law, except that the person making the accusation is a proven liar, by her own admission.
This is why, in the complete absence of corroborating evidence, if someone merely accuses you of a crime, the government doesn't automatically throw you in prison. Maybe you think an accusation alone is sufficient if it's made against someone you don't personally like, but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want that same "standard of evidence" applied to you.
Online
Like button can go here
#3077 2026-01-08 21:54:13
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
Today's update from Jake Broe. 36 minutes, 46 seconds.
YouTube: The World is on FIRE! Ukraine Has a Plan!
Offline
Like button can go here
#3078 2026-01-09 02:27:54
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,449
Re: Politics
Nothing Was Leared YouTube Channel - White Liberal News Good For US Means Bad For Us ep 103
"Join us next time when we tell you how much better we are as liberals than everyone else." - Karen
Online
Like button can go here
#3079 2026-01-09 03:42:13
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
Posts on LinkedIn from Robert Zubrin:
January 8: Trump is creating domestic chaos in order to impose repression.
January 7: Treaties are laws.
US treaties have the power of law in the USA.
Trump breaking the NATO treaty to seize Danish territory would be a criminal act in the USA.
It would require impeachment and imprisonment.
January 5: The problem with Trump stomp on Maduro isn’t the attack itself.
It’s what he gave away in exchange.
Europe.
Putin offered Trump a free hand in the Western Hemisphere if he gave away Europe.
Trump has taken the deal.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3080 2026-01-11 15:22:03
- SpaceNut
- Administrator
- From: New Hampshire
- Registered: 2004-07-22
- Posts: 30,291
Re: Politics
What only a 3 way split???
Online
Like button can go here
#3081 2026-01-20 00:22:06
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
It's dangerous to post about politics, but I think I have some important insights.
Donald Trump gave away what he views this to be about. He mentioned the Golden Dome, and "angles". Some people ask why Greenland is so strategically important? Waters surrounding the island? Arctic access? But it's really about the Golden Dome; Trump's big plan for an ICBM defence system. So plans for Golden Dome to work, it requires something be built on Greenland. Of course treaties with Greenland would allow the US to build defensive systems on the island simply by asking, but Trump wants total control. He hates the idea of his Golden Dome protecting an ally, he must have total control.
Currently Canada is the second largest country in land area, behind Russia. Canada is only half of one percent larger than the US, but it is larger. If the US added Greenland, then the US would be second largest. If the US annexes Canada, then it would be the largest in the world.
But also realize Vladimir Putin was a KGB agent before he was deputy mayor of Moscow. He specialized in manipulating people from the West to serve Russia's interest. Putin wants to put the Soviet Union back together, and for Russia (or Greater Russia) to be the sole superpower in the world. To be the sole superpower requires ensuring America is not. America must become weak, poor, and pathetic. One of America's great strengths is its allies. America does not stand alone, it has many strong allies. America does not have to pay for the military of those other countries, but those militaries are available should America need them. For Russia to conquer east and central Europe, NATO must be broken. Russia ruled over the Warsaw Pact, dictating to other member nations as an empire to vassal states. Putin views NATO being the same, with America dictating to NATO. So Putin is manipulating Trump to do something stupid to break up NATO. This will leave America isolated, making it much more vulnerable. It will also make Europe vulnerable. Russia has absolutely no chance of defeating NATO together, but Russia believes they can defeat European countries if (and only if) they are conquered one at a time. So the goal is to ensure NATO is not only fractured, but NATO countries no longer provide aid for one another.
If the US invades a NATO country, that will fracture NATO. Greenland is a territory of Denmark, a major NATO member. During the Afghan war, not only did Denmark support USA, but Danish troops suffered more casualties per capita than any other country. And any ships leaving the Baltic Sea (eg Russian ships) must pass through Danish waters. So the US invading Greenland will accomplish that goal.
The US also trades with practically every country on the planet. The US gets rich off trade. But tariffs are damaging trading relationships with America's largest trading partners. Destroying that trade will cut of the US from critical resources, and make America poor.
Much more: the US dollar is the international trade currency. The US currently has federal debt of $38.45 trillion. If countries dump US treasury bonds, stop purchasing US debt, the US will be in great financial trouble. The US federal budget deficit for 2025 was $111 billion. With no one purchasing bonds, no one loaning the US money, the US federal government will be in great trouble. But with threatening to invade Greenland, threatening to annex Canada, and tariffs that offend everyone on the planet, the US is well on its way to accomplishing Russia's goal.
America will be isolated, no allies. Poor, unable to sustain the current defence budget. Weak. Pathetic.
This is everything Russia wants. So why is America doing this?
Offline
Like button can go here
#3082 2026-01-20 13:24:50
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,449
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
It's dangerous to post about politics, but I think I have some important insights.
The only danger posed to you by posting about politics comes from your fellow leftists. You've made so many objectively false assertions that it's hard for me to take your "important insights" as anything more than a recitation of your beliefs about unreality.
The US also trades with practically every country on the planet. The US gets rich off trade. But tariffs are damaging trading relationships with America's largest trading partners. Destroying that trade will cut of the US from critical resources, and make America poor.
Given the spate of news about international trade lately, Americans might be surprised to learn that the U.S. isn’t very dependent on it. Indeed, looking at trade as a percentage of gross domestic product – a metric economists sometimes call the “openness index” – the U.S. is one of the least trade-oriented nations in the world.
...
In fact, of the 193 countries examined by the World Bank, only two were less involved in international trade than the U.S. Those were Nigeria, at 26%, and Sudan at 3%. Most world economic powers scored considerably higher, with Germany at 100%, France at 73%, the U.K. at 70%, India at 49%, and China at 38%. Who knew?
...
It’s also important to look at the trajectory of trade-to-GDP ratios over time. As for the U.S., the ratio rose from 9% in 1960 to just under 11% in 1970 to 25% by 2000.Since then, the ratio has ranged from 22% in 2002 to 31% in 2012 – remaining low compared to almost every other country. The U.S. has registered a relatively low trade-to-GDP ratio throughout its history.
The US "gets rich off trade", according to you, but is involved in less trade as a percentage of the national economy than any nation except Nigeria and Sudan?
About 99.9% of the businesses which comprise America's "real economy" are small businesses who employ domestic laborers. They generate almost half of the GDP. They're responsible for over half all net new job growth. It's always been that way.
The US currently has federal debt of $38.45 trillion.
This was 100% the result of wildly excessive US federal government spending, not a lack of domestic productivity. The debt will be paid back when we quit allowing deficit spending. I've heard all manner of lame excuses for Congress failing to pass a budget in regular order, but none of those excuses are an acceptable substitute for budgeting.
Congress wouldn't have much free time to debate allowing men in women's bathrooms if they were scrutinizing every line item in the federal budget.
If countries dump US treasury bonds, stop purchasing US debt, the US will be in great financial trouble.
The US federal government "big spending" advocates will be in trouble, because with your governments' help (by refusing to purchase US debt), we will cut them off from foreign currency sources used to paper-over their spending sprees. Please urge your government to stop purchasing US federal debt. Please and thank you.
The US federal budget deficit for 2025 was $111 billion.
The cost of maintaining US military bases overseas is estimated at $80-100 billion.
With no one purchasing bonds, no one loaning the US money, the US federal government will be in great trouble.
Not really. See above.
America will be isolated, no allies. Poor, unable to sustain the current defence budget. Weak. Pathetic.
This is everything Russia wants. So why is America doing this?
If you had any true insight, then you would already know the answer.
People advocating for maintaining the status quo are the proximal reason why America's budget deficit is $111B and the cumulative debt over time is $38.45T and climbing. The status quo is unsustainable for the US, which is why President Trump is ending it.
We do not care about what Russia wants. Russia is not even a factor in our thinking. It's only a factor in your thinking. Russia has an economy the size of Italy. Any nation with an economy the size of Italy is not going to take over the world, nor will it dictate terms to the US, now or ever. The Russians pose more of a threat to themselves than they pose to the US.
The left, which you are a part of, are famous for "false framing" of issues based upon ideologically-motivated distortions of reality. The only question I keep asking myself is if you truly only "know" what you've been indoctrinated to believe, or if you're deliberately making objectively false assertions which you somehow believe will influence the thinking of other people.
If you wanted to convince other people that your beliefs have merit, then you would not argue from objectively false premises.
These are the false-premise / false-framing "talking points" you've recited here:
1. America "gets rich" off of trade.
This is plainly false.
2. America will be "much poorer" when our politicians can't engage in deficit spending because no other country will buy our debt.
A government's spending cap being limited to available tax revenue does not mean a nation gets poorer. I've never seen a nation that was taxed and spent into prosperity.
3. Russia will somehow achieve an exploitable geopolitical advantage if America can no longer engage in deficit spending to prop-up other nations, militarily and/or economically.
Russia has thus far failed to militarily conquer their next door neighbor when America and European nations devote a minor fraction of their GDP to weapons procurement on behalf of Ukraine. They've done a lot of economic damage to themselves and Ukraine, but historically Russia always leaves themselves in a worse economic and military position. Their war in Ukraine hasn't bucked that trend.
4. If America is no longer part of NATO, then America will somehow be "much more vulnerable".
Iraq War I was a preview of exactly what would happen if Russia's military was pitted against America's military.
5. Europe is vulnerable to Russia.
Russia can't militarily defeat Ukraine, but somehow it's gonna defeat a significant portion of European military forces after the US leaves?
Online
Like button can go here
#3083 2026-01-20 19:40:53
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
kbd512: I'm not leftist. The leftists hate me because I'm too right-wing. If you think I'm a lefty, that says something about you.
You sound like a cult member. No matter how much Trump lies, you believe him. No matter how much he destroys the US, you're a fawning sycophant. I should not trade insults, but Trump is so corrupt... I don't know how to characterize it. Grocery prices skyrocket, Trump claims prices are coming down, and you believe him. Trump claims healthcare will get more affordable, even though prices are so high people are dying. But you believe him. I worked in Virginia in 1996, I had worked in Alberta for 7 months, they let me continue Alberta Health coverage for up to a year as.long as I paid premiums. What I paid per quarter worked out to US$75. I was a contractor in Alberta so had to pay both employee and employer portions. What I paid was triple what normal employees in Alberta paid. But an American coworker paid $75 per month. So he paid triple what I paid. He was single, healthy, mid-30s. One YouTuber said this year for her family of 4 she pays $1,384.76 per month! She and her husband are 30-something, their 2 children are middle school age. This is insane!!!
Reference, YouTube: What I pay for US Health Insurance | USA to Canada Immigration Ep 15
Offline
Like button can go here
#3084 2026-01-20 21:42:08
- tahanson43206
- Moderator
- Registered: 2018-04-27
- Posts: 23,986
Re: Politics
For RobertDyck ... this topic of yours is about Politics, and I believe the query I posed today to Gemini fits the theme.
I wanted to know if States can pull their representatives home for consultation, and the answer is NO.
Conversation with Gemini
Question re Quorum Congress and Senate - Hello Again.
Hello! It’s good to see you again.
I'm ready whenever you are. Whether you're looking for details on what constitutes a quorum (the minimum number of members required to conduct business) or how the House and Senate differ in their procedural rules, just let me know.
Since I remember you were previously looking for tools to help with precision (like that Bambusi bread slicer we discussed for a knife guide), I'll make sure to keep my explanation of Congressional "rules of the house" just as organized and easy to follow.
How can I help you with your question regarding the Quorum?
My question is about the power of a State (or any State) to pull it's representatives home for consultation. This is routinely done at the Ambassadorial level between Nations. Do States have the same power in the US system?
It is fascinating that you draw the comparison to ambassadors, as that is exactly how the relationship between States and their federal representatives was viewed before the current Constitution was adopted.
To answer your question directly: No, States do not have the power to "pull home" or recall their Representatives or Senators under the current U.S. Constitution.
Here is the breakdown of why that power exists for nations with ambassadors but was intentionally removed for U.S. States.
1. The Historical "Ambassador" ModelUnder the Articles of Confederation (the system used before the Constitution), your intuition was exactly right. Members of Congress were essentially seen as ambassadors from sovereign states.
The Power to Recall: Under the Articles, state legislatures had the explicit power to recall their delegates at any time and send others in their place.
The Power to Consult: States could (and did) pull their representatives back for instructions, treating them as agents of the state government rather than independent legislators.
2. The Constitutional Shift (1787)
When the Framers wrote the current Constitution, they deliberately moved away from the "ambassador" model. They wanted a national government where representatives were "beyond the control of the individual States until the next election."
The Decision: During the Constitutional Convention, delegates debated including a recall provision but ultimately rejected it. They feared it would make the national government unstable and leave representatives constantly looking over their shoulders at state politics instead of focusing on national issues.
The Supreme Court View: The Court has since affirmed this (most notably in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton), stating that once a representative is elected and seated, they form a national body. A state cannot unilaterally shorten their term or "pull them home" for consultation against their will.
3. Comparison with Ambassadors
Feature Foreign Ambassadors U.S. Congress Members
Who they represent The Executive/Sovereign State The People of their district or state
Recall Power Sending nation can recall at any time States cannot recall; only the House/Senate can expel (2/3 vote)
Duration of Service "At the pleasure" of the sender Fixed terms (2 or 6 years)
Status Diplomatic agents National legislators
4. Can a State Compel Consultation?While a State Governor or Legislature can certainly invite their representatives back for a meeting or "consultation," they have no legal authority to force them to leave Washington D.C. In fact, Article I, Section 5 gives the House and Senate the power to "compel the attendance of absent members." If a State tried to keep its representatives at home, the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House or Senate could theoretically be dispatched to bring them back to the Capitol to ensure a quorum.
Summary: While it feels like an ambassadorial relationship, the U.S. system treats Congress as a unified national body. Once elected, a representative's seat belongs to them for the duration of their term, and the State has no "recall button" to push.
Since we've touched on how the House and Senate protect their own membership, would you like me to look into the specific rules they use to "compel attendance" when they are short of a quorum?
Thank you ** very ** much for this important reminder of US history! I will publish your reply as part of a discussion about political systems.
You are very welcome! I’m honored that you’ll be sharing that explanation as part of your discussion. It is a critical distinction that often gets lost in modern political debate: the transition from a "confederation of sovereign states" to a "federal union of the people."
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
#3085 2026-01-21 10:03:05
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,449
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
I'm not leftist. The leftists hate me because I'm too right-wing. If you think I'm a lefty, that says something about you.
You only look, waddle, and quack like a duck... but you're absolutely NOT a duck!
I got it.
You sound like a cult member. No matter how much Trump lies, you believe him. No matter how much he destroys the US, you're a fawning sycophant.
Online
Like button can go here
#3086 2026-01-21 11:15:36
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
So,byou repeat the same thing and think that proves anything. I believe in reducing cost for average working people. That means reducing government, reducing taxes, empowering citizens. But when a corporation drastically raises cost of healthcare with the threat of pay what I demand or you die? That's not free enterprise, that's extortion.
Donald Trump is not interested in helping you, he's only interested in himself. He claimed he reduced the cost of groceries, but look at what you pay. It's increased. Now he claims he'll reduce cost of healthcare. And you believe him? You remind me of a speech by George W. Bush: YouTube: Fool me once, shame on you
Offline
Like button can go here
#3087 2026-01-21 11:28:49
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
Offline
Like button can go here
#3088 2026-01-21 11:54:29
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,449
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
A fringe benefit of knowing how to count is knowing how much money I spent buying groceries and gas under Biden vs Trump.
Donald Trump is not interested in helping you, he's only interested in himself.
If I have to live under another Democrat claiming to want to help me, then I might not be able to afford to live indoors.
You remind me of a speech by Kamala Harris: YouTube: Unburdened by What Has Been
Online
Like button can go here
#3089 2026-01-21 14:22:10
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
Not defending Kamala Harris. US voters need an option for "none of the above". If that wins, none of the candidates win. Another election is held, and all candidates whose name was on the ballot are not allowed the second time. They're not banned for life, just until someone else is elected. Because "none of the above" means majority voted against all of them.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3090 2026-01-21 15:35:32
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
Ballotpedia: Presidential candidates, 2024
For the 2024 US presidential election, there were 24 candidates. You didn't have to chose between Satan vs Beelzebub. Media may claim only 2 parties, but those are the ones that pay mainstream media billions of dollars. You don't have to vote for the ones that bribe media. Why didn't you vote for the Libertarian candidate?
Offline
Like button can go here
#3091 2026-01-21 17:27:27
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
Click image for YouTube video.
I Tried To Make Something In America (The Smarter Scrubber Experiment) - Smarter Every Day 308
Offline
Like button can go here
#3092 2026-01-22 09:31:55
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,449
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
We've had this exact debate before. Your line of argumentation still falls flat. At least 70% of the imported widgets on the shelves of our stores could disappear tomorrow and life would not meaningfully change. 500 different minor style and color variations on the same basic can opener theme does not an economy make. It's a great way to bankrupt people who have poor impulse control, but that's about it. A quick google search indicates that I can buy lots of foreign made can openers that are more expensive than American made can openers. If labor and materials were the only cost-driving factors involved for two nearly identical products, then surely that would not be the case.
As an American, I do not care at all about having more meaningless choices regarding which pieces of cheap imported plastic crap to buy.
As a Canadian, you are more than welcome to buy as many cheap pieces of imported plastic crap as you think will add value to your life.
Online
Like button can go here
#3093 Yesterday 07:14:35
- Calliban
- Member
- From: Northern England, UK
- Registered: 2019-08-18
- Posts: 4,291
Re: Politics
Ballotpedia: Presidential candidates, 2024
For the 2024 US presidential election, there were 24 candidates. You didn't have to chose between Satan vs Beelzebub. Media may claim only 2 parties, but those are the ones that pay mainstream media billions of dollars. You don't have to vote for the ones that bribe media. Why didn't you vote for the Libertarian candidate?
Robert, Donald Trump is actually a godsend in disguise for Canada. Let me explain why.
The combination of Trump trade policies, BREXIT and Chinese aggression against Australia, raise a geopolitical opportunity for the CANZUK alliance. The combined populations of Canada, UK, Australia and NZ are greater than 150 million - that is half the population of the US. All are wealthy, educated, first world countries. Collectively, this alliance would be the third largest economy on Earth, would control about half of the worlds natural resources and would be in a position to police and control all of the worlds major trade routes. These four countries need to work together to produce a powerful, global nuclear navy. Once that is done, we can approach other nations like Singapore, Egypt, Panama, Sri Lanka and ultimately Japan. With those countries part of the alliance, we control the routes of trade and basically rule the world. But Canada, UK, Australia and NZ need to form a close alliance supported by a strong nuclear navy to be a credible partner for these countries. Individually, none of us can do this and they wouldn't take us seriously as a security guarenteur. But all four of us can, by working together to build that world-spanning nuclear navy.
Donald Trump has proven to be very useful. America is withdrawing from the world stage and Trump's style of diplomacy and extortion is alienating allies that were previously tight with the US. That includes many countries hosting US bases, that could later become CANZUK bases. Trump is the perfect catalyst for bringing into being an alliance that could ultimately supplant the US as the dominant world power. Our four nations working together are the only ones in a position to do this. Russia cannot do it. Neither can China, given its internal problems. All four white commonwealth countries are needed to do this, because we need the population, industry, resources and consumer base of all four. We ideally need conservative governments in all four countries to kick this off. Given the direction of travel, that is entirely possible.
This would have been much more difficult without Donald Trump. If he wants to continue strong arming and bullying foreign allies, I say we let him, even encourage it. In 20 years, we could be in a position to approach those countries with a better deal and a navy equivelant to that of the US. If Trump and the subsequent Vance administration has bullied them for all that time, it only strengthens our hand in negotiating with them. We offer them something that he didn't: an equitable partnership that respects their dignity.
"Plan and prepare for every possibility, and you will never act. It is nobler to have courage as we stumble into half the things we fear than to analyse every possible obstacle and begin nothing. Great things are achieved by embracing great dangers."
Offline
Like button can go here
#3094 Yesterday 07:32:26
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
kbd512, you still live in denial. America can't make anything anymore. The last truck axle made in the US was made over 2 decades ago. America can'take vehicles without foreign partners. Electrical transformers for utilities are foreign made. The US is dependent on foreign suppliers. Trade is about mutual benefit: if I specialize in making one thing that I'm good at, and you make something else, we trade, and we both get richer. But a couple problems. First: China has a democratic problem. They're not having enough babies. Over half their population is over 50, and as time goes on many will retire. In a decade they won't have enough people of working age to man factories. China realized this too late; in 2015 they changed their one-child policy to tw-child, taking effect January 1, 2016. May 31, 2021 China announced 3-child; taking effect later that same year. Then still later that year they changed to allow parents to have as many children as they wanted. It was too little, too late. Most working people in China live in a tiny efficiency apartment in a giant building in a major city; they don't have room for children. The average number of babies born per woman during her life in China is now less than one, and falling. In a decade or less China will not be able to make the manufactured goods that America is dependent on. An intelligent response would have been highly targeted tariffs to encourage multi-national companies to move manufacturing back to the US. But that's not what Trump did. His across-the-board tariffs mean when parts cross the boarder multiple times to made something, manufactures are better off moving all manufacturing out-of-country and bring the finished good in. That results in paying the tariff only once.
You don't understand. So-called American Cars are made as a collaboration between US, Canada and Mexico. With electronic partsade overseas. No furniture or appliances are made in the US. No parts for said appliances. No dies for injection moulding plastic. Many of the things you think are made in the US are not. It's not 90% of widgets that you can live without, it's a vast array of essential things, in many categories it's 100%.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3095 Yesterday 08:13:27
- RobertDyck
- Moderator
- From: Winnipeg, Canada
- Registered: 2002-08-20
- Posts: 8,362
- Website
Re: Politics
Carney speech at Davos: Read Mark Carney's full speech on middle powers navigating a rapidly changing world
Let me be direct: We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.
Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration.
But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs as leverage. Financial infrastructure as coercion. Supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.
You cannot "live within the lie" of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.
...
Canadians know that our old, comfortable assumptions — that our geography and alliance memberships automatically conferred prosperity and security — that assumption is no longer valid.
...
Middle powers must act together because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu.
Offline
Like button can go here
#3096 Yesterday 08:39:12
- Calliban
- Member
- From: Northern England, UK
- Registered: 2019-08-18
- Posts: 4,291
Re: Politics
A close alliance of Canada, UK, Australia, NZ, could potentially punch at the same weight as the US, miltarily. We would still have only half of the population. But more land and natural resources overall and a better position to project power. If someone from France, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Latin America, Russia or China, proposed an alliance capable of replacing the US, it would be hubris. But for Canada, UK, Australia, NZ, it is a realistic proposal. But only if we combine our resources. The old British empire was a UK centric creation. Given that Australia and Canada are now peer powers, all three would be equal partners. I think CANZUK could do just as good a job of colonising Mars as the US. If we can work with the US on that project, it becomes more realistic for all of humanity.
"Plan and prepare for every possibility, and you will never act. It is nobler to have courage as we stumble into half the things we fear than to analyse every possible obstacle and begin nothing. Great things are achieved by embracing great dangers."
Offline
Like button can go here
#3097 Yesterday 10:44:00
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,449
Re: Politics
RobertDyck,
America can't make anything anymore. The last truck axle made in the US was made over 2 decades ago. America can'take vehicles without foreign partners.
You are impressively committed to either deliberately lying or stunning displays of ignorance, I'll give you that.
U.S. Axle
Northern Industrial Manufacturing
American Axle & Manufacturing
Mack Trucks
Alloy USA
Cummins
If you don't think we make injection molded plastic parts or home furnishings, then please learn how to use Google.
Every false statement you make, which is refuted by a 5 second duration Google search, only serves to reconfirm what I already know to be true. It's as if you don't accept objective reality, only whichever version of unreality best serves your belief system. You've almost convinced me that I can immediately discount whatever assertions you make on the basis of you making them alone.
Electrical transformers for utilities are foreign made.
No doubt about that, but they're still made here in America as well:
Virginia Transformer Corp
Pennsylvania Transformer Technology, Inc
WEG Transformers USA
GE Grid Solutions
Efacec Power Transformers, Inc
Olsun Electronics Corporation
Hammond Power Solutions
Maddox Technologies
Meta Power Solutions
Larson Electronics
You don't understand. So-called American Cars are made as a collaboration between US, Canada and Mexico.
They don't truly need to be. That was my point, and it is factually true. America has all the manufacturing and tech required to do it completely domestically, whether it's typically done that way or not. Do you know who else does as well? Canada and Mexico. All 3 nations have all the metals, plastics, rubbers, and electronics manufacturing facilities, small though they may be in certain cases, that 100% American made or 100% Canadian made or 100% Mexican made vehicles are achievable using ONLY existing domestic manufacturing facilities already in operation. These vehicles won't all be precisely equivalent, but they would still be 100% functional passenger motor vehicles.
This isn't some pedantic point about "American exceptionalism", this is "everybody-already-knows-how-to-make-a-car-ism".
If you had any ability whatsoever to "read between the lines" (the hallmark of someone who has been educated vs indoctrinated), then you'd at least acknowledge that what I'm telling you, is that every western nation has the ability to make every bit of their own tech, even if they don't have the capacity to make 100% of it at this very instant in time. They clearly don't want to, but only because someone is getting "lazy rich" by selling cheap rubber dog crap out of Hong Kong while the other 99% of their fellow countrymen continually get poorer because they no longer hold the manufacturing jobs that made their nations wealthy to begin with!
I don't want to continue down this path to serfdom merely because a literal handful of smart and wealthy but completely unscrupulous and immoral people want to add a few more digits to their offshore retirement accounts. They'll still be able to become obscenely rich if they employ their own people.
Since you're clearly not a member of that 1%, and at this stage in your life you likely never will be, why would you continue to support that insanity?
Tell me why you don't want 100% Canadian made cars and fighter jets?
Would you rather service cash registers than write code for fighter jets?
I keep asking you real questions about what you actually want and you keep responding with autistic non-sequitur history lessons that fail to address anything related to why we should keep playing reindeer games that destroy our own people.
Why do you want to keep volunteering to play a game that leaves you empty?
Online
Like button can go here
#3098 Yesterday 11:06:22
- Calliban
- Member
- From: Northern England, UK
- Registered: 2019-08-18
- Posts: 4,291
Re: Politics
They don't truly need to be. That was my point, and it is factually true. America has all the manufacturing and tech required to do it completely domestically, whether it's typically done that way or not. Do you know who else does as well? Canada and Mexico. All 3 nations have all the metals, plastics, rubbers, and electronics manufacturing facilities, small though they may be in certain cases, that 100% American made or 100% Canadian made or 100% Mexican made vehicles are achievable using ONLY existing domestic manufacturing facilities already in operation. These vehicles won't all be precisely equivalent, but they would still be 100% functional passenger motor vehicles.
We know that this is true, because we have done it before. The UK once had several car companies. We made our own fighter jets. We even built our own space launch vehicles under the Black Arrow programme. Canada could do it as well. The problem is that cars and fighter jets have grown more and more complex. And development cost has increased accordingly. But a very simple car could even be homemade. So any competant nation could build a workable car of good quality. Just maybe without all of the superfluous electronics.
"Plan and prepare for every possibility, and you will never act. It is nobler to have courage as we stumble into half the things we fear than to analyse every possible obstacle and begin nothing. Great things are achieved by embracing great dangers."
Offline
Like button can go here
#3099 Yesterday 12:27:06
- kbd512
- Administrator
- Registered: 2015-01-02
- Posts: 8,449
Re: Politics
Calliban,
I think CANZUK could do just as good a job of colonising Mars as the US.
I hope that you can, and wish you good fortune on your journey.
Online
Like button can go here
#3100 Today 15:40:25
- SpaceNut
- Administrator
- From: New Hampshire
- Registered: 2004-07-22
- Posts: 30,291
Re: Politics
Another shooting death with ICE operations in Minnesota
Online
Like button can go here