Trump commits treason

[Tassman]

The weirdest part of this election cycle is that because Trump's entire argument for his candidacy is that America is in the dumps and needs fixed

?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...ction=politics

so now it's Democrats who are the only ones rah rahing about how awesome out country is because, objectively, thing are better than they used to be. It's weird.

Oh, and if anyone wants to complain about that, please include your birth year so I can slap you in the face with crime statistics and maybe other stuff if I have free time after my canvass tomorrow.

[Starlight]

Well Russia seems to have decided on its choice. Apparently the Russian government employs an army of online trolls for its own state propaganda purposes, to "correct the record" as it were, and endorse Putin online and critique political opposition inside Russia. Apparently a lot of these accounts have rebranded themselves as US conservatives who support Trump.

Of course the major problem would come if Russia decided to hack the electronic voting machines. A few people have been sounding the alarm bells about that possibility lately.

[seanD]

I was going to ask who the sides are, and note that having to ask who the sides are would seem to indicate it ain't much of a war.

Several multiple African and middle eastern countries are involved. Western forces against Islamic State, including US, NATO and Russia, and multiple sectarian Islamic groups and governments against each other. It's not as clear cut as previous hot world war scenarios because it's much more scattered, fragmented and chaotic. It's also not getting as much press, probably because it's not as sexy as a US against Russia or China scenario, though that's definitely building too.

[Tassman]

Several multiple African and middle eastern countries are involved. Western forces against Islamic State, including US, NATO and Russia, and multiple sectarian Islamic groups and governments against each other. It's not as clear cut as previous hot world war scenarios because it's much more scattered, fragmented and chaotic. It's also not getting as much press, probably because it's not as sexy as a US against Russia or China scenario, though that's definitely building too.

ISIS etc want nothing more than a religious war, so why play into their hands? Treating them as criminal insurgents is more appropriate and seems to be more effective.

[Tassman]

Well Russia seems to have decided on its choice. Apparently the Russian government employs an army of online trolls for its own state propaganda purposes, to "correct the record" as it were, and endorse Putin online and critique political opposition inside Russia. Apparently a lot of these accounts have rebranded themselves as US conservatives who support Trump.

Of course the major problem would come if Russia decided to hack the electronic voting machines. A few people have been sounding the alarm bells about that possibility lately.

If this is true then Putin is committing criminal acts within the US and the Orange One is committing treason by encouraging him.

[Starlight]

ISIS etc want nothing more than a religious war, so why play into their hands? Treating them as criminal insurgents is more appropriate and seems to be more effective.

Well yes, the people who have been held prisoner by ISIS and gotten away without being executed, have pretty consistently said words to the effect of: "ISIS wants to portray this as a religious war of the west vs Islam, because that would encourage the billion Muslims in the world to join ISIS's side against the west, so whatever you do make sure you in no way portray this as a west vs Islam conflict."

IMO, one of the best moves the west has done was the recent election of a Muslim as the mayor of London. For the most historically influential city in the West to elect a muslim mayor shows clearly to Muslims that the west isn't anti Muslim.

Of course the Christian conservatives are desperate to give ISIS what they want by making this into a west vs Islam conflict.

[Starlight]

If this is true then Putin is committing criminal acts within the US and the Orange One is committing treason by encouraging him.

Hmm I'm not sure that trying to influence another country's election to achieve a favourable outcome counts as a criminal act. America's done it to more than a few other countries so turnabout seems fair. And I doubt encouraging such interference counts as treason. Putin and Trump merely share common interests, much like Clinton and Wall St do.

[Jaecp]

Hmm I'm not sure that trying to influence another country's election to achieve a favourable outcome counts as a criminal act. America's done it to more than a few other countries so turnabout seems fair. And I doubt encouraging such interference counts as treason. Putin and Trump merely share common interests, much like Clinton and Wall St do.

Criminal isn't the right word, per se, because its not like Russia has to follow our laws, but I'm pretty sure attempting to sabotage an election constitutes an act of war or, at the very least casus belli.

[Starlight]

I'm pretty sure attempting to sabotage an election constitutes an act of war or, at the very least casus belli.

Hmm, but by that standard, Clinton's interference in the Honduras coup would seem to give Honduras legitimate grounds for declaring war on the US. For a country that has tinkered, and more than tinkered, so much in the elections and politics of other nations, it would seem a double standard for the US to get overly offended when the same was done in return by others.

[Jaecp]

Hmm, but by that standard, Clinton's interference in the Honduras coup would seem to give Honduras legitimate grounds for declaring war on the US. For a country that has tinkered, and more than tinkered, so much in the elections and politics of other nations, it would seem a double standard for the US to get overly offended when the same was done in return by others.

Honduras is Honduras and America is America, neh?

[Mountain Man]

The weirdest part of this election cycle is that because Trump's entire argument for his candidacy is that America is in the dumps and needs fixed so now it's Democrats who are the only ones rah rahing about how awesome out country is because, objectively, thing are better than they used to be. It's weird.

Oh, and if anyone wants to complain about that, please include your birth year so I can slap you in the face with crime statistics and maybe other stuff if I have free time after my canvass tomorrow.

"Things are objectively better..."

If you consider stagnant wages, record low workforce participation, high unemployment (regardless of what the official numbers say), miniscule GDP growth, rising healthcare costs with less choice for patients, out of control illegal immigration, frequent terrorist attacks on our own soil, increased racial tension, distrust of our police fostered by our own president, and that's not even talking about the mess Obama has made on the international scene to be "objectively better". Of course Democrats are cheering about how wonderful everything is even if they have to lie through their teeth to do it. What choice do they have? Do you really expect them to admit that by any objective measure, Obama has been a terrible president?

[Mountain Man]

Then there are those clueless network pundits claiming that Hillary's acceptance speech was "Reagan-esque" and that Democrats are the new "God and country" party. Reminds me of those low-information morons who call Obama a right-leaning moderate.

lol

[KingsGambit]

Criminal isn't the right word, per se, because its not like Russia has to follow our laws, but I'm pretty sure attempting to sabotage an election constitutes an act of war or, at the very least casus belli.

If you apply this statement to current events in the Middle East... I don't think you want to go there.

[Jaecp]

If you apply this statement to current events in the Middle East... I don't think you want to go there.

Star already went there. It's something I acknowledge.

Edit: well, he said central America, but it's the same

[Tassman]

Criminal isn't the right word, per se, because its not like Russia has to follow our laws, but I'm pretty sure attempting to sabotage an election constitutes an act of war or, at the very least casus belli.

Well hacking is criminal in that it comes under 'The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act". And while Russia doesn't have to follow US laws I would have thought that if a US citizen such as Trump engages in or benefits from such activity then he's committed a criminal act...even treasonous given that Putin is hostile to the US.