Jump to content

Trump screwed up in FA?


Caecus
 Share

Recommended Posts

Trump's recent call to Taiwan has stirred up a hornet's nest, breaking away from the US One China policy that has been the diplomatic standard for over three decades. Most people call it a screw up. Some call it a deliberate change in US foreign policy, a possibility that we must entertain. But his recent comments on Fox News Sunday suggest Trump will place Taiwan on the table for negotiation, a nightmare scenario of a nation being propped up by the US.  

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ND8IMjwxes&t=279s

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/chinese-paper-calls-trump-as-ignorant-as-a-childafter-taiwan-comment/2016/12/12/d91fbaea-c02c-11e6-b20d-3075b273feeb_story.html?utm_term=.d37a81f15c3d

 

China recently flew a nuclear bomber outside its territorial limits as a threat to the incoming administration. The recent comments and the threatening actions of the Chinese suggest Taiwan may end up as nuclear fodder at worst, trade fodder at best. Either way, Taiwan's days might be numbered. If you could short a country, Taiwan might be the one in the upcoming years. 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-bomber-flight-send-message-donald-trump-taiwan-a7468021.html

 

 

On one day, he took a phone call from Taiwan that alienated China. On another day, he went to Fox News suggesting he might put Taiwan on the table for negotiation on trade, alienating Taiwan. Did Donald Trump screw up with far eastern foreign affairs?

  • Upvote 1

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I despise Trump.  

 

Really, I believe almost any whacked out shit someone says about him if its bad.  You know, bias and all that, I'm human.

 

But I think he's playing a game with China.  The game is "We are stronger right now.  We get to set the rules, and you've been acting too big for your britches, so I'm gonna slap your ass down a bit".  He views relationships as a set of transactions, and doesn't believe in mutual respect or goodwill.  I'm not ready to say he screwed it up.  Maybe he can get "something" out of China for doing something("one china policy") that other presidents just did for free.

Duke of House Greyjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump's recent call to Taiwan has stirred up a hornet's nest, breaking away from the US One China policy that has been the diplomatic standard for over three decades. Most people call it a screw up. Some call it a deliberate change in US foreign policy, a possibility that we must entertain. But his recent comments on Fox News Sunday suggest Trump will place Taiwan on the table for negotiation, a nightmare scenario of a nation being propped up by the US.  

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ND8IMjwxes&t=279s

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/chinese-paper-calls-trump-as-ignorant-as-a-childafter-taiwan-comment/2016/12/12/d91fbaea-c02c-11e6-b20d-3075b273feeb_story.html?utm_term=.d37a81f15c3d

 

China recently flew a nuclear bomber outside its territorial limits as a threat to the incoming administration. The recent comments and the threatening actions of the Chinese suggest Taiwan may end up as nuclear fodder at worst, trade fodder at best. Either way, Taiwan's days might be numbered. If you could short a country, Taiwan might be the one in the upcoming years. 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-bomber-flight-send-message-donald-trump-taiwan-a7468021.html

 

 

On one day, he took a phone call from Taiwan that alienated China. On another day, he went to Fox News suggesting he might put Taiwan on the table for negotiation on trade, alienating Taiwan. Did Donald Trump screw up with far eastern foreign affairs?

 

Trump has no idea what he's doing, Putin is doing that grin and patting himself on the back for putting this Nero into power. Gg.

  • Upvote 4

The Coalition Discord: https://discord.gg/WBzNRGK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he goes Judas on Taiwan considering all the support the US gives to Israel (because it's a bastion of "freedom and democracy" in the Middle East), it would definitively prove the hypocritical stance of the US and remove  any shred of credibility of the whole trying to "spread peace and democracy abroad" narrative. 

 

Taiwan is one of the few gems of real democracy in East Asia. President Tsai is not only of indigenous Taiwanese descent, but the first female elected-leader of any Chinese majority country as well as the only female in East Asia who is not a relative (spouse, daughter, ect.) of a former political leader. Not only that but until 1979 Taiwan (aka the Republic of China) was the "REAL China".

 

I encourage anyone who hasn't visited both the PRC and the ROC to do so and compare and see the contrast between the quality of life in the two nations. Anyone whose visited the ROC will have no doubt as to who the true cultural heir to China is. The PRC only started caring about "Traditional Chinese Culture" as a marketing tool to encourage more tourism. 

 

Considering that the Philippines is siding up with China and Russia, Malaysia's President $ being seized by the Dept of Justice over the whole 1MDB scandal, the US cutting off military aid to Thailand since the coup of 2014, alienating Indonesia by Trumps inflammatory statements toward Islam, and Singapore about to be put in its place by China over the whole SAF training in Taiwan (and towing the US line vis-a-vis the South China Sea dispute). It behooves the US to stand by whatever allies it has left in the East Asian theater. If she's willing to toss Taiwan so easily, I wonder what type of signal this would send to Japan or S. Korea?

 

(In Trumps defense, it seems he isn't offering up Taiwan (ROC), he is just stating that he doesn't need to abide the 1-China policy, and is trying to get the PRC to incentive his continued acceptance of the 1-China policy (Which the US already recognizes) by receiving favorable trade concessions--its extortion really. Frankly many if not most Taiwanese are content with the Status Quo, but Trump recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation would only be to the ROC's benefit. As long as he doesn't stop military aid to Taiwan I personally don't see an issue with things so far...)

Edited by Lam Songman
  • Upvote 4

!å清å¤æ˜Ž!

 

"The resort to wu (warfare) is an admission of bankruptcy in the pursuit of wen (civility or culture). Consequently, it should be a last resort. Expansion through wen... is natural and proper; whereas expansion by wu, brute force and conquest, is never to be condoned.†

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As he recently said, they can meet all his demands and he'll continue to do what previous Presidents have done. If not then he'll go against them and likely lean on Europe to do the same which will hurt China's pride quite a bit certainly which is bad for their leader who'll look weak. Whatever hype China has they will not be taking Taiwan as Trump has made it clear that while he does not want to be opposing Russia he has no issues doing so with China, and as a strongman he can't have the damage to his reputation if he were to lose Taiwan (as an existing ally, America doesn't own the country obviously).

 

China is a piece of crap while Taiwan isn't. I support any effort that spits in China's face and supports Taiwan.

 

Trump has no idea what he's doing, Putin is doing that grin and patting himself on the back for putting this Nero into power. Gg.

 

McCarthyism is back baby.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

China recently flew a nuclear bomber outside its territorial limits as a threat to the incoming administration. The recent comments and the threatening actions of the Chinese suggest Taiwan may end up as nuclear fodder at worst, trade fodder at best. Either way, Taiwan's days might be numbered. If you could short a country, Taiwan might be the one in the upcoming years. 

Wow, are you implying that China will actually use nuclear weapons if candidate x is elected? Where have I seen that before? 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, China won't use a nuclear weapon. And I'm not referencing their no-first-use policy, because that's BS. 

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, are you implying that China will actually use nuclear weapons if candidate x is elected? Where have I seen that before? 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, China won't use a nuclear weapon. And I'm not referencing their no-first-use policy, because that's BS. 

 

To be fair, Goldwater was not elected, largely because of that ad. 

 

Does China need to use a nuclear weapon to make trouble in the South China sea? 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't NEED a 50 megaton nuke to defend yourself. Just get a dog. 

 

I wouldn't worry about it.

 

You know, that reminds me. Do you think the US would use nuclear weapons if China invaded Taiwan? The possibility of a Korean War disaster could happen, in light of the US military presence. 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Olv16bP.jpg

 

Our new evil, diabolical plot:

 

Hack both political organizations, release content on only the one political party opposed to Russian interest to influence the most divisive election in recent US history just so Americans can elect a pro-Putin, egocentric, flatter-prone demagogue - who is an incompetent at foreign affairs and national security issues in Eastern Europe - that appointed a pro-Russian secretary of state who can lift the crippling embargoes and isn't willing to check Russian expansionism in the Middle East and Ukraine. 

 

FIFY.

  • Upvote 3

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, that reminds me. Do you think the US would use nuclear weapons if China invaded Taiwan? The possibility of a Korean War disaster could happen, in light of the US military presence. 

 

 

No.  It wouldn't be in the US's best interest to use nukes due to two foreign countries being at war.

 

The only time I'd see US using nukes is a direct invasion of US soil.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.  It wouldn't be in the US's best interest to use nukes due to two foreign countries being at war.

 

The only time I'd see US using nukes is a direct invasion of US soil.

 

I have to agree. Which puts the US at a real disadvantage if China does go to war against Taiwan. 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our new evil, diabolical plot:

 

Hack both political organizations, release content on only the one political party opposed to Russian interest to influence the most divisive election in recent US history just so Americans can elect a pro-Putin, egocentric, flatter-prone demagogue - who is an incompetent at foreign affairs and national security issues in Eastern Europe - that appointed a pro-Russian secretary of state who can lift the crippling embargoes and isn't willing to check Russian expansionism in the Middle East and Ukraine. 

 

FIFY.

 

You know, the Democrats, Clinton especially, could just not... be as bad as they were? If Russia did hack (with like an Axe?), and there is no actual evidence, then what did they ultimately do? They didn't hack the voting machines to directly change the outcome, they didn't stuff paper ballots at the polls, or whatever else. They revealed the Democrats did some things they shouldn't have. I care less about the Russians possibly doing such things than Clinton and all the rest's bad stuff. 

 

As for the Republican party info and it not coming out, I trust Julian Assange's words that they were basically nothing. Trump is the man who had the media firing everything at him, negative story after negative story, do you think anything there would have damaged him? Get out of here. What of Ryan and the rest? Trump was running as an outsider, hitting them would mean nothing in relation to Trump.

 

 

No.  It wouldn't be in the US's best interest to use nukes due to two foreign countries being at war.

 

The only time I'd see US using nukes is a direct invasion of US soil.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Relations_Act

 

China invading Taiwan wouldn't just be "two foreign countries being at war". Not to say they'd use nukes but the United States could be tasked with defeating the Chinese military, and helping remove them if they manage to take over the Island. 

 

What appears to be happening is as I said months back. Trump wants to be friendly with Russia as he sees China as the threat, not Russia. Encircle China and starve it of support (getting the Russians on side is pretty big) and then if his threats get carried out Economically damage them. Such possible future efforts that Trump has shown interest in is why China is very scared at the moment as its bad juju for them. In response the Chinese have made some empty threats backed up by some meaningless actions mostly but they've also gotten closer to Iran apparently. Perhaps China will enter into the middle east in full and start supporting fanatics against American friendly dictators? May we all live in interesting times.

 

Which they fully deserve of course. China is terrible on its own, but their treatment of Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, their continued support of North Korea, their claims on international waters, their claims on other countries land, it just goes on with them. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, the Democrats, Clinton especially, could just not... be as bad as they were? If Russia did hack (with like an Axe?), and there is no actual evidence, then what did they ultimately do? They didn't hack the voting machines to directly change the outcome, they didn't stuff paper ballots at the polls, or whatever else. They revealed the Democrats did some things they shouldn't have. I care less about the Russians possibly doing such things than Clinton and all the rest's bad stuff. 

 

As for the Republican party info and it not coming out, I trust Julian Assange's words that they were basically nothing. Trump is the man who had the media firing everything at him, negative story after negative story, do you think anything there would have damaged him? Get out of here. What of Ryan and the rest? Trump was running as an outsider, hitting them would mean nothing in relation to Trump.

 

You're right, it's entirely possible that the CIA, FBI, and other major US intelligence agencies are just a bunch of democrats and are spreading false information. Oh yeah, and Julian Assange is pretty much synonymous with trust! I think it's the reason why both Democrats and Republicans all want to sit him down in a room, talk with him over some coffee and donuts, and then charge him for treason. 

 

Let's be clear here, are you saying that Russia was not involved at all in the election? Or are you saying that they were involved, they just so happened to only have damaging information (because those damn democrats, amirite?) on the one party that was clearly hostile towards Russian interests? 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, it's entirely possible that the CIA, FBI, and other major US intelligence agencies are just a bunch of democrats and are spreading false information. Oh yeah, and Julian Assange is pretty much synonymous with trust! I think it's the reason why both Democrats and Republicans all want to sit him down in a room, talk with him over some coffee and donuts, and then charge him for treason. 

 

Let's be clear here, are you saying that Russia was not involved at all in the election? Or are you saying that they were involved, they just so happened to only have damaging information (because those damn democrats, amirite?) on the one party that was clearly hostile towards Russian interests? 

 

What? How the hell did you get that out of what I said? I said the Democrats/Clinton could have just not done what was shown in the leaks, not that the CIA/FBI/so on are Democrats. If they had nothing wrong then what would there have been to leak?

Your point on Assange is?

 

Look at my post and answer it and stop jumping at shadows. I have never said they weren't involved nor that they didn't obviously favour Trump, of course they bloody did. They certainly didn't hack the election, but hacked some emails? Perhaps, but again, there is no evidence and even if there was it'd be irrelevant. Now you have someone who says they want peace with you and the other who wants war, of course they favoured Trump. 

Regarding Trump just refer back to what I said previously. What exactly would Russia get that would damage Trump? That he grabs !@#$? That he made a lot of money doing X? That he brags about paying people to forward his interests? Short of some secret paedophile plot, which you keep referencing here when no one has brought it up, nothing would effect Trump anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, that reminds me. Do you think the US would use nuclear weapons if China invaded Taiwan? The possibility of a Korean War disaster could happen, in light of the US military presence. 

Almost 100% no. If we do, I suspect it would be more to show escalation dominance as opposed to actually harming China. If you are interested in this stuff, I recommend this book. For some reason, the TSA didn't like me bringing it onto the plane. It's not like I could've had a nuke in my pocket or something. The TSA is weird. 

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, it's entirely possible that the CIA, FBI, and other major US intelligence agencies are just a bunch of democrats and are spreading false information. Oh yeah, and Julian Assange is pretty much synonymous with trust! I think it's the reason why both Democrats and Republicans all want to sit him down in a room, talk with him over some coffee and donuts, and then charge him for treason. 

 

Let's be clear here, are you saying that Russia was not involved at all in the election? Or are you saying that they were involved, they just so happened to only have damaging information (because those damn democrats, amirite?) on the one party that was clearly hostile towards Russian interests? 

Assange is American? Treason?

 

I have no clue what exactly Russia hacked. Russia supposedly hacked the DNC and possibly the RNC and purportedly accomplished the impossible task of hacking the polls which were never had any server access to hack in the first place. Supposedly Russia is now the American Bogeyman. Serious question. Why? What is to be accomplished by any of this? And if any of this is true, what now? What are we going to do about it? What can we do? Embargoes? Wave a fist?

 

I seriously hate politics and politicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? How the hell did you get that out of what I said? I said the Democrats/Clinton could have just not done what was shown in the leaks, not that the CIA/FBI/so on are Democrats. If they had nothing wrong then what would there have been to leak?

Your point on Assange is?

 

Look at my post and answer it and stop jumping at shadows. I have never said they weren't involved nor that they didn't obviously favour Trump, of course they bloody did. They certainly didn't hack the election, but hacked some emails? Perhaps, but again, there is no evidence and even if there was it'd be irrelevant. Now you have someone who says they want peace with you and the other who wants war, of course they favoured Trump. 

Regarding Trump just refer back to what I said previously. What exactly would Russia get that would damage Trump? That he grabs !@#$? That he made a lot of money doing X? That he brags about paying people to forward his interests? Short of some secret paedophile plot, which you keep referencing here when no one has brought it up, nothing would effect Trump anyway.

 

Affect. And yeah, I got to admit, Trump is at a political low and it doesn't seem to affect anyone. To be fair though, in May, I thought the worst thing he ever said was that Mexicans are rapists and drug dealers (some, of course, he assumes are good people). Then Hollywood Access hit the fan. I'll bet there is a recording out there of him saying the n-word. Whether or not Trump has more stuff in a closet, it's tough to say if it will affect him or not. Up until about a month ago, I was fully convinced that this guy has shot himself in the foot too many times to become president. Trump is a political zombie, very few people would argue against that. 

 

 

Almost 100% no. If we do, I suspect it would be more to show escalation dominance as opposed to actually harming China. If you are interested in this stuff, I recommend this book. For some reason, the TSA didn't like me bringing it onto the plane. It's not like I could've had a nuke in my pocket or something. The TSA is weird. 

 

Well, during the Korean war, MacArthur had suggested the use of tactical nuclear weapons on China (before the rest of the world stole American nuclear tech.). From strictly a military perspective, the use of the nuclear weapon on Beijing would have likely resulted in China immediately seeking a peaceful resolution, but instead the Eisenhower administration dismissed his idea as lunacy. If history is any judge, the use of nuclear weapons (even in a "limited" context) might be well regarded as an insane idea. I can perhaps picture the US finding a bikini atoll in the South China sea and taking a giant nuclear shit over it to freak the Chinese out, but nothing actually targeting anything Chinese. 

 

 

Assange is American? Treason?

 

I have no clue what exactly Russia hacked. Russia supposedly hacked the DNC and possibly the RNC and purportedly accomplished the impossible task of hacking the polls which were never had any server access to hack in the first place. Supposedly Russia is now the American Bogeyman. Serious question. Why? What is to be accomplished by any of this? And if any of this is true, what now? What are we going to do about it? What can we do? Embargoes? Wave a fist?

 

I seriously hate politics and politicians.

 

That is a good question. Obama is flailing at this point, since he's only in office for like another two weeks but says he's going to make Russia pay the consequences. I'm sure there is crap he can do that is outside of our knowledge, but it still doesn't change the fact that Trump might overrule in January. In light of Trump's Sec State pick, I'll put good money on Rex lifting the sanctions on Russia in the near future (I'll guess June of next year). 

 

Jill Stein is an idiot. She pulled her stunt to stay in the political spot light and become the next Sanders in 2020, but she could have done nothing and we still wouldn't notice jack crap. But outside of Jill Stein, nobody really thinks that Russia hacked the polls. Russia just seemed to favor Trump by releasing damning documents on Clinton. 

 

Why, well... This is just me, but I think Putin is still in power because of nationalist feeling. The collapse of the Soviet Union as a world power was a tremendous moral blow to people who generally remember a time when Russia was great. Putin offers a "Make Russia Great Again" by seemingly involving itself in an antagonistic way similar to the glory days of the Soviet Union. An observer of Putin's actions might rightfully come to the conclusion that Putin is interested in putting back the Soviet empire together (this time without the weird ideological bent). A couple of things stand in his way though. NATO being one. The US in the middle east being the other. Both have sought to check his advances and the sanctions have been crippling Russia's economy. But Putin manages to stay in power because it seems like everyone is taking Russia seriously again. 

 

To give you some stats in terms of pure economics, Russia only accounts for 2.4% of the world's GDP. The US alone commands some 22%. Combined with the EU, they boast roughly 50% of the entire world's GDP. Add Canada, China, and Brazil (Yes, the GDP of Brazil is more than Russia), and you have 75% of the world's total GDP. To give you some perspective, the former Soviet bloc had 40% of the world's GDP. Russia is a joke, nobody takes the country seriously anymore (and rightfully so). Putin is interested in fixing that, and it gives him a huge popularity boost at home (and keeps him in power). 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, it's not a good thing that Russia tried to influence our elections.

 

If they even did.  Although the CIA and FBI are supposedly sure, no evidence has been released and Julian Assange has claimed WikiLeaks did not receive info from Russia.

 

If this has happened, our government needs to take leadership and show Russia the iron fist.

 

 

But there's another issue.  What was actually in the emails.

 

Let's say someone commits a murder.  Two months later, a private investigator knowingly and illegally obtains evidence that shows this person has committed murder.

 

What matters more?  The person actually committing the murder?  Or the PI gaining the information illegally?

 

 

Of course I'm not advocating for any foreign government to even attempt to influence our elections (if they did).

 

But the voters did deserve to know about the corruption, disorganization, and horridness of the modern Democratic Party and their nominee, the Wicked Witch of the West.

MAKE ORBIS GREAT AGAIN !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, it's not a good thing that Russia tried to influence our elections.

 

If they even did.  Although the CIA and FBI are supposedly sure, no evidence has been released and Julian Assange has claimed WikiLeaks did not receive info from Russia.

 

If this has happened, our government needs to take leadership and show Russia the iron fist.

 

 

But there's another issue.  What was actually in the emails.

 

Let's say someone commits a murder.  Two months later, a private investigator knowingly and illegally obtains evidence that shows this person has committed murder.

 

What matters more?  The person actually committing the murder?  Or the PI gaining the information illegally?

 

 

Of course I'm not advocating for any foreign government to even attempt to influence our elections (if they did).

 

But the voters did deserve to know about the corruption, disorganization, and horridness of the modern Democratic Party and their nominee, the Wicked Witch of the West.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/21/us/supreme-court-says-police-may-use-evidence-found-after-illegal-stops.html?_r=0

 

 

lol, me thinks you hate Clinton. 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cops aren't private investigators, but nice try

 

That's about as close as you can get to a supreme court case though. I imagine cops have certain protections under the law that PIs don't. 

 

 

Then again, my view of private investigators is a guy in a trench coat following people into their homes and shit.  I'm actually not too familiar with the extent of the law protecting private investigators. If the PI trespassed and obtained information, I'm pretty sure the PI would be charged regardless of whether or not he helped in an investigation. 

 

 

Also, "private investigator" is a rather docile euphemism for the cyberwarfare division of the FSB. 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.