The Trump Presidency...

In a thread about Stacker Trump?
Yeah in a thread about trump you put up stories of children in court that happened before he was president. Almost as if you didn't bother reading the links properly and just thought they were anti trump.
 
Awwwwww, Macron is no longer Dumps BFF, yep he's a goner, replaced by Dumps NEW BFF Kimmie!

President Tangerine Twot's White House has reportedly removed several photographs of French President Emmanuel Macron and replaced them with framed photos of North Korea dictator Kim Jong-un.
Are you channelling the spirit of Bugsy?
 
The big picture is being missed here, it's about big business and it's grip on politics

Private prisons want children to be incarcerated so they get more money, hence why they spent big lobbying Trump for this to happen

Here is an article from 2017, about a private prisons company called the GEO Group that had allegedly asked Republicans to submit a law that could lead to immigrant children being indefinitely detained in its lucrative centers.
 
In true Hair Furor style the orange clown finds someone else to blame for another one of his idiotic policy's this time it's Kirstjen Nielsen, Secretary of Homeland Security, who emerged on Monday as the face of the administration’s “zero tolerance” border policy. she has consistently argued that implementing a zero tolerance policy would be tremendously difficult.

News outlets have reported that:

"Trump has been livid about Nielsen’s performance in what is potentially the biggest domestic crisis of his presidency. He has told allies that he already felt “duped” that Nielsen, who was not a Trump supporter during the 2016 campaign, was appointed SoHS".

"Sessions officially announced the zero-tolerance policy in early May, but the issue came to a head two days later in a Cabinet meeting at which Trump blew up at Nielsen. Trump berated the DHS secretary, pushing her to the brink of resignation. Several of those present at the meeting said it was the most uncomfortable scene they have witnessed in their professional lives"

"Trump allies who are trying to make the argument that the administration’s policy is not the problem — it’s the poor implementation and planning that are the issue are pointing to this piece of her résumé as proof that it’s Nielsen who is the real problem"

Me: Hmmmmm, Somebody else about to be Fired or Quit very soon ?

Meanwhile as @Zemlyak mentioned above John Kelly the Dumps Chief of Staff maybe getting ready to depart the Whitzetag.

"Kelly’s status in the White House has changed in recent months, and he and the president are now seen as barely tolerating one another. According to four people close to Kelly, the former Marine general has largely yielded his role as the enforcer in the West Wing as his relationship with Trump has soured. While Kelly himself once believed he stood between Trump and chaos, he has told at least one person close to him that he may as well let the president do what he wants, even if it leads to impeachment".

Me: aaaaaaand, Replaced by another Truppet Minion who won't say didly shit against Hair Furor ?
 
Last edited:
From one of China's National Newspapers:

It is US arrogance to believe that a trade war will exhaust China. But the boot is on the other foot. Trade is mutually beneficial to both the US and China. Scuppering bilateral trade would cause similar suffering to both sides. This simple truth can never be wrong. Great uncertainties also loom regarding where the US, under Trump's nationalism, will end up. Against such backdrop, China must keep sober, adapt itself to the changing situation, and try to deal with the US with new measures.





China knows better as Trump tariff strategy tricks US voters
Dealing with the US is difficult, but China can easily refuse theft and coercion. China will remain with the US through negotiations and war. If a trade war between the two becomes fierce, the result will not provide a favorable political environment for President Trump.



http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1107467.shtml
 
Chinese Press Part 2:

According to Western media, the US is considering sending a warship through the Taiwan Straits. If true, that means Washington is ready to pile more pressure on China. On the same day the news came out, two US B-52 bombers reportedly took off from Guam and flew to the vicinity of China's Nansha Islands. Later, a spokesperson for the US Pacific Air Forces denied it.

The US military has not formally confirmed that it would send a warship through the Taiwan Straits. Yet these messages, real or not, constitute psychological warfare against China. Putting pressure on China from all directions has lately become the general US attitude toward Beijing.

Some people from Washington believe that it is easy for the US to make trouble for China: They think the cost is very low or even nothing. They imagine they can gain Chinese cooperation and obedience to US interests this way.

The US has never frightened any small country so far. How could it possibly scare a major power like China? Be it the Taiwan Straits or the South China Sea, the actual effect of provocation by the US will only be to boost Beijing vigilance.

When there is vigilance, there will be actions. The discomfort those actions bring to the US will generally equal the discomfort Washington brings to Beijing.

From time to time, elites from Washington threaten to be tougher on China. The Chinese side has responded with a low-key attitude and avoided proactively escalating friction between the two. But if the US takes practical actions, it will be another story. Beijing will not yield to Washington's real provocations.

The US military better not get too close to the Taiwan Straits or stir up trouble there. Military confrontation has not yet formed in the Taiwan Straits and it is hoped that day will never come.

But once the worst case scenario occurs, China is prepared to safeguard its national sovereignty and dignity at any cost. By then, China will be difficult to deal with and the US will find that military confrontation against Beijing in the Taiwan Straits is too heavy a burden to bear.

If Washington's real intention is to create tension in Sino-US ties and it is willing to pay any price for it, there will be another story between China and the US as well as in the Asia-Pacific region.
 
Chinese Press Part 3:

US Lieutenant General and director of the Joint Staff Kenneth McKenzie, when asked whether the US has the ability to "blow apart" China's "man-made" islands, said the US military has had a lot of experience in the West Pacific taking down small islands and that doing so is a core competency of the US military. (To be honest here McKenzie was responding to a question and was NOT threatening China, but the Chinese State Press doesn't see it that way)

.Is McKenzie threatening China? Whatever his intentions were, this was the impression he left through media reports. Of course the US has the ability to destroy an isolated island but reminding people of such ability is sometimes seen as a political provocation, which McKenzie must have learned during his military education.

In fact the People's Liberation Army (PLA) also has the ability to destroy any source of attack that threatens to strike a Chinese island, including destroying supportive maritime platforms and military bases. This is also the PLA's core competency. However, China's defense ministry and generals from the General Staff department never stress this fact to the US military. China's military is obviously more restrained.

What does it mean to destroy a Chinese island? It is a declaration of war on China. We do not believe the US government would dare to attempt such folly against a nuclear power, although the current administration is pretty much a bigger showoff than its predecessors.

Hurling threats at each other is not conducive to either the US or China. The current US administration cannot bear the risk and responsibility of starting a war with China in the South China Sea. The US generals should not play along with the US media to fan this stimulating rhetoric.

China's construction on the Nansha islands fall under Chinese sovereignty. These islands need to be protected. Therefore deploying defensive weapons is just as logical as planting trees. Given the complex geopolitical situation where US warships, including its aircraft carriers, continue to cruise the region, how could there not be even one air-defense or anti-ship missile on the islands? The US has deployed more of its military assets in the South China Sea than those of the other countries in the region. And Washington has the temerity to repeatedly accuse Beijing of "militarizing" the South China Sea. We have seen hypocritical diplomatic rhetoric but none matches the US tactic of a thief crying "stop thief."

The danger in the South China Sea is caused by the US continuing to increase its military presence in the region, forcing China to naturally upgrade its defensive weapons on the islands. This in turn gives the US more excuses to exert military pressure, causing regional tensions to spiral.

If the US-China military rivalry becomes the main theme of the South China Sea, it will impact regional peace and development. No regional country can benefit from this rivalry. Although some regional countries are pleased to see Washington balancing out Beijing's influence in the South China Sea, they must remain vigilant that the US might use them as pawns in a dangerous game that will be completely out of their control.

As for the continuous provocative comments from the US, China should remain calm. The US political system decides that the country talks more than it acts. The US will continue to come up with new ways to exert pressure. However, by looking at how Washington runs up against a stone wall when interfering in other regions, we know the US, despite its bluffs, cannot shake a powerful country like China. Today's China should not be disturbed by various comments and misinformation from the US. It should maintain its composure.

...............................................................................................................................................................................................................

The reasoning for the above posts is to point out to the Truppets that Donald Dumps policies may not turn out the way he wants them too and by continuing to alienate the rest of the World "America First" may become "America Fists Itself"
 
Lots of countries arent war zones, maybe they need to **** off there.
Why dont you campaign for the UK to accept all these poor people rather than lecture another country on what they should do?
But the US is the nearest so I dont see the issue.

Why should I do that? I can comment on whatever I see fit, its not like the US is full or lacking space
 
Its his country, why are you getting upset about it? Do you campaign for better treatment of illegal immigrants in the UK? Nah you dont do you, you hypocritical belter.
I can comment on whatever I want, immigrants coming into the UK has nothing to do with this, for a start it has its own comment thread and I dont think you understand what "hypocritical" means based on that comment.

Again with the bullshit of saying someone shouldnt comment on "A" becuase they havent commented on "B" which you consider important.

Funny how Trump doesnt want to take responsibility for this isnt it, not surprsiing with all the bad press he is getting becuase of it.
 
Chinese Press Part 2:

According to Western media, the US is considering sending a warship through the Taiwan Straits. If true, that means Washington is ready to pile more pressure on China. On the same day the news came out, two US B-52 bombers reportedly took off from Guam and flew to the vicinity of China's Nansha Islands. Later, a spokesperson for the US Pacific Air Forces denied it.

The US military has not formally confirmed that it would send a warship through the Taiwan Straits. Yet these messages, real or not, constitute psychological warfare against China. Putting pressure on China from all directions has lately become the general US attitude toward Beijing.

Some people from Washington believe that it is easy for the US to make trouble for China: They think the cost is very low or even nothing. They imagine they can gain Chinese cooperation and obedience to US interests this way.

The US has never frightened any small country so far. How could it possibly scare a major power like China? Be it the Taiwan Straits or the South China Sea, the actual effect of provocation by the US will only be to boost Beijing vigilance.

When there is vigilance, there will be actions. The discomfort those actions bring to the US will generally equal the discomfort Washington brings to Beijing.

From time to time, elites from Washington threaten to be tougher on China. The Chinese side has responded with a low-key attitude and avoided proactively escalating friction between the two. But if the US takes practical actions, it will be another story. Beijing will not yield to Washington's real provocations.

The US military better not get too close to the Taiwan Straits or stir up trouble there. Military confrontation has not yet formed in the Taiwan Straits and it is hoped that day will never come.

But once the worst case scenario occurs, China is prepared to safeguard its national sovereignty and dignity at any cost. By then, China will be difficult to deal with and the US will find that military confrontation against Beijing in the Taiwan Straits is too heavy a burden to bear.

If Washington's real intention is to create tension in Sino-US ties and it is willing to pay any price for it, there will be another story between China and the US as well as in the Asia-Pacific region.

China is playing the long game, and appears to be winning while the US only looks as far as the next set of elections.
 
Stacker, this used to be a mildly entertaining thread with some interestingly diverse opinions, you’re tedious trolling has wrecked it. Be a good lad and off you guck.
Mildly entertaining? "Hilarious" names for Trump? Links that have **** all to do with Trump? Cut & Paste jobs, some of which are written by people who are bellthronks? Yeah that's really entertaining.
 
I can comment on whatever I want, immigrants coming into the UK has nothing to do with this, for a start it has its own comment thread and I dont think you understand what "hypocritical" means based on that comment.

Again with the bullshit of saying someone shouldnt comment on "A" becuase they havent commented on "B" which you consider important.

Funny how Trump doesnt want to take responsibility for this isnt it, not surprsiing with all the bad press he is getting becuase of it.
To clarify you want to whine and cry about another country's leader response to immigration but not mention your own? Sound like you are a hypocritical belter to me.
 

Top