The Media Industry

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by texas_ex2000, Jul 22, 2016.

  1. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 2,500+ Posts

    Yes. Russia wasn't a problem before Putin. NATO defense spending and Russia defense spending track. And Putin already has his 2020 spending goals, as does the US. France announced their 2019 defense expenditures just days after Trump July NATO experience. Trump's remarks had ZERO effect on any NATO member 2019 defense budget. In fact, NATO members reaction to Trump's remarks was to make plans to defend Europe in the event the US leaves NATO. You would think Trump would declare victory in his agenda of a more self-reliant European defense, right?
     
  2. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    You hit on the reason for any increase in military buildup. Crimea. It makes sense that the Russia invasion would prompt more concern by those in Europe in the form of funding, greater buildup of forces and an overall greater focus.
     
  3. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 2,500+ Posts

    The biggest threat to Putin isn't NATO. It's the price of a barrel of oil. They lose about $2b a year in revenue for every dollar it drops.
     
  4. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    It isn't his remarks. They, if anything, undermine efforts to get Europe to boost their defenses because they make increasing spending politically more difficult. Nobody wants their constituents to think they were intimidated into doing something.

    However, one thing that discouraged Europe from boosting its defenses (especially within NATO rather than through building an EU military) was our own drawdown. If we didn't seem committed to NATO, it made our calls for them to spend more ring hollow. (This is why Democrats don't have any credibility on the issue even though they're correct when they criticize Trump for rhetorically undermining the alliance.)

    Obviously, nobody expected us to stay at Cold War levels (been 250K and 350K troops) after the fall of the Soviet Union, but we took them far too low in the early 2010s even though Russia was rapidly building its military. In fact, when we closed the Mannheim and Heidelberg communities in 2013, we didn't have a single tank on the continent and had plans to cut back even further. The Obama Administration did reverse course after Crimea, and the Trump Administration has gone further.

    And this is the problem. While we've been building up our forces (which was likely the work of Secretary Mattis), Trump's rhetoric was often going in a different direction. Were his comments negotiating tactics or real policy? An ally has no way to know, which is why support is building for countries to put new forces into an EU military rather than under the NATO command.

    We've been able to somewhat manage the issue, because Mike Pence in coordination with Mattis was often the one dealing directly with European leaders on the specifics. Mattis is obviously a brilliant guy, and Pence has always been supportive of the alliance. However, Mattis is out, and Pence only has authority that Trump gives him. So who knows what's going to happen next?

    He talks out of his *** on foreign policy. He doesn't know what he wants or what constitutes a victory. Frankly, that was the biggest reason why I didn't vote for him. Europe isn't supposed to be "self-reliant." It's supposed to be defended by an alliance of nations who put forth a floor of effort (2 percent of GDP) under a unified command. That system has kept a previously war-torn continent at relative peace for 70 years.
     
  5. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada 10,000+ Posts

    So then what is Putin's motivation to help elect a man who was far more likely to take the brakes off of American energy production, as opposed to the woman who was far more likely to continue Obama's policies designed to make production more difficult and more expensive?

    Your statement puts the lie to the entire notion of Russian collusion. Well done.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  6. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    The national media has been making a big deal out of this local story because they so, so wanted the shooter to be white
    He wasnt
    Story now dropped and poor little girl quickly forgotten

     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Statalyzer

    Statalyzer 10,000+ Posts

    1) Not necessarily disagreeing, but how do we know it's that system that changed the warring nature of Europe and not anything else?

    2) The issue with the alliance of mututal defense being "how Europe is defended" is that it's the NATO, not the ETO.
     
  8. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    So turns out the mom of the victim may have known the killers, and lied to the police about it
    Perhaps even worse, our police chief (the old Austin chief) apparently knew the real story but ran with the fake story anyway

     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2019
  9. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Acevedo is a SJW. Sad to see politics being prioritized over justice.

    Another example of how social justice does not lead to justice.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    Virtue signaling is bad policy.
     
  11. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    We don't know that. It's a complex issue driven by a myriad of factors. Obviously, Europe has a different culture now, and I think its people frankly got sick of fighting each other. However, there's more to it. People have always gotten sick of fighting and then after awhile they get pissed off about something and started fighting again. That happened in WWI and happened countless times over the previous several hundred years, and of course, despite the presence of treaties and promises to maintain peace, old hostilities and distrust reemerged.

    Things were different after WWII. Specifically, the US decided to maintain its presence and integrate its economic and military power in Europe, none of which happened after WWI. By having a US presence in Europe, countries like France and Britain didn't feel the need to completely crush Germany, because they could count on the United States to keep Germany in line. That helped foster trust between those countries that still exists at least on the most fundamental issues. Furthermore, by having the US specifically in Germany both economically and militarily, it blunted the rise of a militaristic German nationalist movement like what occurred after WWI, which led to the rise of the Nazi Party. It also avoided economically calamity, which could easily have caused West Germany to install a Marxist-Leninist government like the East did.

    The bottom line is that we were a stabilizing presence. We were able to keep economic stability and neutralize the distrust that normally persists after countries go to war. Is that the only reason Europe has been at peace? No, but it's a pretty significant one. Had we left as we left after WWI, things likely would have been very different and not for the better.

    But those aren't the terms of the treaty. It's a mutual defense agreement. That means that, though defending Europe is part of it (and realistically the biggest part of it), it's not the only part. If the United States or Canada was attacked, the European countries would be obligated to join the defense effort.
     
  12. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Remember that story about microwaves or sonic pulses physically damaging our employees at the US Embassy in Havana (and perhaps other embassies)?
    Glenn Greenwald says it was all nonsense, that it was a story cooked up by the CIA and spread through its fakenews spreaders at NBC/MSNBC. The claim now is the sound heard was crickets. His full article in in the embedded link


     
  13. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Joe and others, an interesting thing I have come to learn is that it is common practice for the CIA and NSA to place "their guys" in TV and print media companies.

    When you watch ABC, CBS, NBC or read the major newspapers much of that story is the CIA approved message. It is no 4th estate. It is a wing of government at this point.
     
  14. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

  15. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    They dont seem very smart
     
  16. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

  17. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Pointing out a nuance that continually gets lost from those expecting any media to only have a single perspective.
    DwfV-_aWwAA70iG.jpg
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. BrntOrngStmpeDe

    BrntOrngStmpeDe 1,000+ Posts

    SH,
    I agree with you that different authors can have different opinions and perspectives, but the folks that make the decisions about which author/article gets published and how prominently, is all about the leadership of the publication/site and their anti-Trump preferences.

    If you could find any articles on that site that have a remotely pro-trump or pro-GOP stance then you might have a point, but I don't think you can(I looked and I wasn't able to). And if you can't find anything like that, then one can only conclude that they are a mouthpiece for the left and will take whatever position is opposite Trump just to be anti-Trump.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. horninchicago

    horninchicago 10,000+ Posts

    @BrntOrngStmpeDe agreed. No one believes, though they may pretend to, that individual writers have editorial and publishing authority.
     
  20. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Vox has a pretty hard lean to the left, just as Breitbart is an equivalent media site on the right. Does either site profess ideology consistency or are they more political mouthpiece?

    These web entities run on a shoestring budget with zero investigative journalism. They are dedicated to instant blogging and clicks that drive up add revenue.
     
  21. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    To be fair, I don't think Vox claims to be a news site, so I wouldn't expect investigative journalism from them. They are commentators, policy analysts, and "explainers" of the news. They are solidly left, but they have tolerated conservative points of view in the past. In fact, I used to listen to Ezra Klein's podcast from time to time. Though he can be smug and douchy when he's on TV, he sometimes interviewed conservative guests and was very good at it. He was actually pretty good at setting aside his politics to let the guest get his points across, and when he did challenge something, he was always respectful and raised fair points.

    Like a lot of other media outlets, they changed after Trump took office. Conservative viewpoints are tolerated less, and when they are tolerated, it's almost always through the lens of Trump-bashing. That gets predictable and old, so I stopped listening.
     
  22. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    CIA media plants certainly seem to be after Tulsi Gabbard since she announced. It's pretty thick
     
  23. Phil Elliott

    Phil Elliott 2,500+ Posts

    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Hot Hot x 1
  24. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Come on it, and have a seat

     
  25. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    Actually, he's a guy I don't like seeing get into trouble. I liked seeing him lure and get a bunch of child molesters thrown in the slammer. I admired his work - probably saved some kids from getting harmed.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  26. I35

    I35 5,000+ Posts

    The main stream media wonders why their ratings have dropped so far and the approval ratings are an all time low. Two days ago they were gloating about Nancy strong arming or flexing her muscle over Trump by telling him not to do the SOTUA and then yesterday crying and whining when Trump had to put Nancy back in her place by refusing to pay for her trip across the ocean for 7 days with a group of Dems. Oh the Bus to Nowhere. :lmao: The unloading and walk of shame they felt climbing out of the bus. :popcorn::trophy::beertoast:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  27. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 2,500+ Posts

  28. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    So far NO Dem has explained how it was necessary Nan and horde to go now for a week when She is as I understand it necessary as Speaker to be in talks to end shut down???

    All the other whining is just silly and I am sure the 800k who are waiting for this to end would also like to know why she would go on a at this point unnecessary trip.
     
  29. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    See if you can spot the difference

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  30. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    24 hours of the media -- from bombshell, bombshell, bombshell to damning, damning to frustrating, frustrating, frustrating

     

Share This Page