So now Turkey are bombing the Kurds in Syria after Trump let them.  Talk about throwing them under the bus.  Disgraceful.

Trump needs to go.

Let's keep to the facts, Turkey hasn't started bombing the Kurds...............yet.

But it shows Trump has no qualms about jumping in bed with the wannabe dictator Erdogan. Of course once again this will all somehow be the fault of the elite.  

And just rambling for a moment, Don would be better of the with the username Pol Pot. Lets face it the Killing Fields was just an exercise in making sure the elite - you know doctors, teachers, anyone that wore glasses etc - knew their place in society

I'm honestly surprised the Americans Backed the YPG in the first place as for the following
- They are Communist to VERY EXTREME LEFT
- They have Strong Links to the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party), A listed terrorist organization in the US and its allies/Satellites.
- They are Allied to and Support Assad's Government

The Yanks only armed them to fight Isis in the first place, this was bound to happen after they have outlived their use, as they did with the Taliban in Afghanistan and all the other pawns they used. IRRC they are still being armed and backed by Russia and China.
The only Reason I can see why this is happening is to appease the Turks as they fear them and treat them as terrorists. This is unsurprising, the only way I can see them surviving is with Assad backing them to repel the invaders or resorting to a guerrilla campaign against the turks.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-07/who-are-the-syrian-kurds-the-u-s-is-abandoning-quicktake

So now Turkey are bombing the Kurds in Syria after Trump let them.  Talk about throwing them under the bus.  Disgraceful.

Trump needs to go.

Let's keep to the facts, Turkey hasn't started bombing the Kurds...............yet.

But it shows Trump has no qualms about jumping in bed with the wannabe dictator Erdogan. Of course once again this will all somehow be the fault of the elite.  

And just rambling for a moment, Don would be better of the with the username Pol Pot. Lets face it the Killing Fields was just an exercise in making sure the elite - you know doctors, teachers, anyone that wore glasses etc - knew their place in society

If I remember correctly; Pol Pot, a dictator who thought is country was too left leaning, made everyone drive on the right side of the road instead.

That was Burma IIRC, Pol Pot Committed Mass murder and Genocide in Cambodia, killing all who were too 'European'. You could be killed for pretty much anything. They Also forced people to abandon urban areas and modern technology.

Later, After the Vietnamese Ousted him, the Yanks backed his guerrilla fighters to topple the pro-veitnamese Government that they installed.

"......critics say they dominate places at top universities and are far overly-represented in senior roles in politics, law, media and business.": Isn't the answer then to review what State schools are doing?

The other thing with de-funding private schools is that the Government i.e. taxpayer then has to spend the money elsewhere on educating the students displaced as a result, which might wind up being *more* expensive. But for Labour I suspect this is more about disliking private schools on principle.

And I recall that was General Ne Win in the early 1970s? Either way, a majority of mechanized vehicles on Myanmar's roads today seem to be imported used Japanese cars which are of course RHD.

No - I made the comment due to your continued railing against the elite in this thread and other posts.

I haven't followed up on the story, but when I looked at it quickly the other day it was a motion that was passed by a majority at the Labour party conference- which of course could have been as low as 51%. Did Corbyn actually vote for the policy change - anyone got a link?

As for Carnot's comment about the Scandinavian democracies - most have a better standard of living than Australia, and going by the way Australia is quickly moving towards a police state, the local populace probably have greater freedoms.

Well you know me, I love my tall poppies.

My contention is that although I understand the wish to finally destroy the British class system, getting rid of their schools altogether isn't the way to do it. If anything I think they're welcome to have their incredibly well resourced and networked schools as long as its not a significant drain on the public purse unlike us.

I think we've gone too far here in Australia but then look at the last time a leader publicly railed against the very top schools in Australia taking public money - Mark Latham. Even cutting the extremely generous funding we give the private system under the Howard-devised social-economic funding gets stiff resistance - what's the matter with these schools, do they like being on the dole?

Private schools - by all means. Private schools sucking down more Commonwealth money than the national public system? No, sorry that's just too inefficient and unequal.

Let's keep to the facts, Turkey hasn't started bombing the Kurds...............yet.

They have now...

Let's keep to the facts, Turkey hasn't started bombing the Kurds...............yet.

They have now...

They have indeed........ and Trump's response

They didn't help us in the Second War War, they didn't help us with Normandy.

I didn't see Americans too involved at Dunkerque or in the Battle of Britain either.

This guy is a piece of smeg - you can't go on defending the indefensible people

This whole saga could see a severe fracturing in NATO.

How will the EU respond given that Turkey holds the key to flooding Europe with millions more refugees, and yet they are still aligned as a NATO partner?

It's gonna get real ugly.

Interesting to see bipartisan support in the US Congress for sanctions against Turkey:

Ummm, not sure what to say:

That letter certainly gets straight to the point!

Thump's handler is stepping up
http://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/world/middleeast/kurds-syria-turkey.html

Joe Biden and son Hunter are corrupt thieves beyond belief. It was widely reported that Hunter Biden made $1 million from his dealings in the Ukraine but now a Ukranian MP (Alexander Dubinsky) has tabled documents in Ukranian parliament showing the fees paid were in excess of US $16 million. From TASS Newsagency;

According to the politician, "the son of Vice-President Joe Biden was receiving payment for his services, with money raised through criminal means and money laundering." He also clarified that "Biden received money that did not come from the company’s successful operation but rather from money stolen from citizens."

Dubinsky stressed that the information on Hunter Biden’s income under his contract with Burisma is a "link that reveals how money is siphoned [from Ukraine]."

So Joe Biden used his influence as US Vice President to stop any investigation into his son's activities - no wonder with that amount of embezzlement going on. And people still think that Trump asking for cooperation in investigating that theft is the problem?

For all the pollies who are caught with the snout in an illegal trough, it makes me wonder how many get away without being caught.

So Joe Biden used his influence as US Vice President to stop any investigation into his son's activities - no wonder with that amount of embezzlement going on. And people still think that Trump asking for cooperation in investigating that theft is the problem?

At a fundamental level, Irregardless of whatever the smeg Biden has done (a wide grey area in US politics), Trump is blatently going against the consitution.

So Joe Biden used his influence as US Vice President to stop any investigation into his son's activities - no wonder with that amount of embezzlement going on. And people still think that Trump asking for cooperation in investigating that theft is the problem?

At a fundamental level, Irregardless of whatever the smeg Biden has done (a wide grey area in US politics), Trump is blatently going against the consitution.

How was Trump supposed to get corruption by a previous administration overseas investigated then? As I posted earlier, the son of a former Vice President appears to have embezzled $16 million from a foreign nation - isn't it in the US public interest if its properly investigated?

So Joe Biden used his influence as US Vice President to stop any investigation into his son's activities - no wonder with that amount of embezzlement going on. And people still think that Trump asking for cooperation in investigating that theft is the problem?

At a fundamental level, Irregardless of whatever the smeg Biden has done (a wide grey area in US politics), Trump is blatently going against the consitution.

How was Trump supposed to get corruption by a previous administration overseas investigated then? As I posted earlier, the son of a former Vice President appears to have embezzled $16 million from a foreign nation - isn't it in the US public interest if its properly investigated?

Uh, with the tools that the US Government has?

So Joe Biden used his influence as US Vice President to stop any investigation into his son's activities - no wonder with that amount of embezzlement going on. And people still think that Trump asking for cooperation in investigating that theft is the problem?

At a fundamental level, Irregardless of whatever the smeg Biden has done (a wide grey area in US politics), Trump is blatently going against the consitution.

How was Trump supposed to get corruption by a previous administration overseas investigated then? As I posted earlier, the son of a former Vice President appears to have embezzled $16 million from a foreign nation - isn't it in the US public interest if its properly investigated?

Uh, with the tools that the US Government has?

Can you identify that process?

@DonDunstan Yes it is wrong for Trump to seek help. One Hunter Biden was never under investigation. Two there is no evidence Hunter Biden doing anything wrong in the Ukraine. It may look suss sure, but nobody has found any evidence of wrongdoing. And that is the key point. And you know you are in trouble when Sen Jim Jeffries (Ohio) is arguing your case. He is a nomark of the highest order.

Pure and simple it was Trump trying to get dirt on a Political opponent by basically blackmailing a foreign power by threatening to withdraw aid. And that is against the constitution.

Michael

My bad. Its Jim Jordan not Jeffries.

Michael

Joe Biden and son Hunter are corrupt thieves beyond belief. It was widely reported that Hunter Biden made $1 million from his dealings in the Ukraine but now a Ukranian MP (Alexander Dubinsky) has tabled documents in Ukranian parliament showing the fees paid were in excess of US $16 million. From TASS Newsagency;

According to the politician, "the son of Vice-President Joe Biden was receiving payment for his services, with money raised through criminal means and money laundering." He also clarified that "Biden received money that did not come from the company’s successful operation but rather from money stolen from citizens."

Dubinsky stressed that the information on Hunter Biden’s income under his contract with Burisma is a "link that reveals how money is siphoned [from Ukraine]."

So Joe Biden used his influence as US Vice President to stop any investigation into his son's activities - no wonder with that amount of embezzlement going on. And people still think that Trump asking for cooperation in investigating that theft is the problem?

Clutching at straws old boy.

If Biden & Son are guilty of corrupt conduct then they should be subject to the full force of the law.

Just like Trump. Or are you saying he should get special consideration? After all he's just the guy that took $1m for his election campaign from Gordon Sondland, but then claims he "hardly knew" the bloke

Clutching at straws old boy.

If Biden & Son are guilty of corrupt conduct then they should be subject to the full force of the law.

Just like Trump. Or are you saying he should get special consideration? After all he's just the guy that took $1m for his election campaign from Gordon Sondland, but then claims he "hardly knew" the bloke

Okay you and mejhammers have a point in that if Trump's call is proven to be unconstitutional then so be it; but there's an enormous amount of the evidence against him that's purely anecdotal, second or third hand. We've already had a reading of what the Senate thinks of it an there's pretty much no Republicans prepared to vote for it at this stage; their vote will be vital if an impeachment goes ahead. Sure, Trump is not as pure as the driven snow but then none of them are, look at how many donations to the Clinton Foundation Hillary solicited as Secretary of State - a conflict of interest if ever there was one.

You keep forgetting that there's ordinary Americans out there who voted for him ON PURPOSE (amazing I know) but they'll be furious if Trump gets impeached over this; they'll view it as a politically-motivated removal from office of their chosen President and like the attempted impeachment of Bill Clinton I believe this will have an unintended consequence of destroying any chance the Democrats will have of getting elected in 2020.

Hillary said yet again the other day that she was thinking of running again - oh Lord! The only circumstance I can think of is that if Trump is impeached and removed from the race. Does the constitution say anything about impeached Presidents running again?

Addendum: The ultimate Trump-hating journal The Washington Post says it has legal advice that Trump could run again even if he's actually removed from office by the Senate - but even they acknowledge all this is incredibly unlikely.

There's a lot of bluff going on with the China/USA agreement on trade; it'll be interesting to see if either an agreement is reached or the trade war escalates although nobody seems confident that it'll be resolved with a big signing agreement at Mar a Lago as he's always envisaged?

You keep forgetting that there's ordinary Americans out there who voted for him ON PURPOSE (amazing I know) but they'll be furious if Trump gets impeached over this; they'll view it as a politically-motivated removal from office of their chosen President and like the attempted impeachment of Bill Clinton I believe this will have an unintended consequence of destroying any chance the Democrats will have of getting elected in 2020.



There is little chance of Trump actually being impeached.

It requires a 2/3 majority of both houses for an impeachment to succeed.

Not enough Republicans will vote out a Republican President.
However, it appears that Trump has at least technically committed breaches of the constitution.
I think the Democrat strategy is to reveal how Trump has been behaving like a Mafia don in the hope that more moderate Republican voters will not support him in 2020.
This may or may not work given the extent of bitterness in the US political divide.

I don't think Biden is up to being President, but neither are any of the other Democrat contenders.
Hopefully someone will appear by 2024, but he will have a serious problem unscrambling Trump's foreign policy chaos.



Peter

...


Hopefully someone will appear by 2024, but he will have a serious problem unscrambling Trump's foreign policy chaos.

Peter

I'm going to go against the grain here (as usual) and say that Trump does have a coherent foreign policy - it involves splitting the world into competing trading blocs like the height of the Cold War and holding that pattern for however long is necessary. Hey, it worked with the Soviet Union.

You keep forgetting that there's ordinary Americans out there who voted for him ON PURPOSE (amazing I know) but they'll be furious if Trump gets impeached over this; they'll view it as a politically-motivated removal from office of their chosen President and like the attempted impeachment of Bill Clinton I believe this will have an unintended consequence of destroying any chance the Democrats will have of getting elected in 2020.



There is little chance of Trump actually being impeached.

It requires a 2/3 majority of both houses for an impeachment to succeed.

Not enough Republicans will vote out a Republican President.
However, it appears that Trump has at least technically committed breaches of the constitution.
I think the Democrat strategy is to reveal how Trump has been behaving like a Mafia don in the hope that more moderate Republican voters will not support him in 2020.
This may or may not work given the extent of bitterness in the US political divide.

I don't think Biden is up to being President, but neither are any of the other Democrat contenders.
Hopefully someone will appear by 2024, but he will have a serious problem unscrambling Trump's foreign policy chaos.



Peter

2/3 Senate vote is needed for a conviction. You can be impeached without being convicted.

I think the Democrat strategy is to reveal how Trump has been behaving like a Mafia don in the hope that more moderate Republican voters will not support him in 2020.
This may or may not work given the extent of bitterness in the US political divide.

You do wonder what wrongdoing or crime it would take for him to lose that support. For Trump's base he can do no wrong and many moderate Republicans benefit from their vote.
This is not just a US phenomena as politics globally is becoming more polarised than ever. Maybe a Bloomberg vs Trump battle of the $$$ is just what the election needs.