News:

You have [3] new messages in your inbox

Main Menu

Picking Cain's Brains

Started by Cain, March 24, 2010, 10:01:25 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Cain on January 24, 2019, 09:29:15 PM
1. Maduro is a bastard.  He's the worst of Chavez and not very smart to boot.
2. He blatantly rigged the last election.  The other guy is probably the legitimate leader, as per the US and EU's comments, though I'd personally prefer a re-run under the auspices of international observers.
3. The US actually doing anything will be horrific.  It is already trying to engineer a diplomatic and possibly hostage crisis with its own embassy staff.
4. Actual action by the US is probably the one thing left that could get people to unify behind Maduro.
5. Keep an eye on Brazil.  Their new President is a neofascist who admires Trump, and the US and Brazilian military have surprisingly strong links.  Colombia would be the more logical proxy, but they're currently having issues with regards to the peace process and may be too tied up keeping the border issue maintained to do much more.

I absolutely guarantee that we will fuck the dog on this one.  169%.
Molon Lube

Cain

It's looking that way.  Brazil also worries me, because the President is already having a mini-scandal over his son's links to a Rio de Jainero death squad.  Is it Wag the Dog time? I'm not clear enough on Brazil's political culture right now to say for sure  (I was both disturbed and alarmed to see just how many inroads Evangelicals had made into the nominally still Catholic Brazil and its elite power structures), but the internal political conditions there will absolutely affect their and the US response.

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Cain on January 25, 2019, 07:37:26 AM
It's looking that way.  Brazil also worries me, because the President is already having a mini-scandal over his son's links to a Rio de Jainero death squad.  Is it Wag the Dog time? I'm not clear enough on Brazil's political culture right now to say for sure  (I was both disturbed and alarmed to see just how many inroads Evangelicals had made into the nominally still Catholic Brazil and its elite power structures), but the internal political conditions there will absolutely affect their and the US response.

Does Brazil even have the infrastructure to attack Venezuela?  I know they can punch Uruguay, Argentina, etc, but Venezuela is on the other end of the rain forest.
Molon Lube

Cain

They've actually been relocating troops to the northern Amazon for a couple of decades now as part of a long-term plan to bolster border security in the north, but their overall prescence is pretty patchy.  The plan was to bring in the military, build the infrastructure, and populate the north with displaced residents from the northeast region, but with the fall of the military government, everything except the first one stalled.  They do have the airports, but the highways are in bad shape.

That said, my thinking was Brazilian soldiers (with US oversight) training Venezuelans and sending them through the barely defended border.  There's a lot of Venezuelan refugees in Florida (for the wealthy ones) and Colombia (for the poor ones), and with Elliot Abrams in the mix, we know death squads are going to be a plan somewhere along the way.

Brother Mythos

Cain,

What is your take on this Daily Mail article? Is it legitimate?

"Britain's man in the the US says Trump is 'inept': Leaked secret cables from ambassador say the President is 'uniquely dysfunctional and his career could end in disgrace'"

Here's the link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7220335/Britains-man-says-Trump-inept-Cables-ambassador-say-dysfunctional.html?ito=amp_twitter_share-top

Thanks.
Discordianism is fundamentally mischievous irreverence.

Cain

Probably, yes.

While it's worth taking anything in the Daily Mail with a pinch of salt, it should be noted that the former editor has stepped down and the Mail is now trying to fill the "centre-right" market in the UK newspapers, a position that has been vacated over the past decade or so by the Telegraph, which has seen a certain level of improvement in its reporting. Also this has been reported elsewhere.

Part of the ambassador's remit is to observe the political culture in the host country for how it may impact on their state's interests. Trump has been...disquieting for the UK, because he comes at a time when our relationship with Europe is poor, we are under increased pressure from Russia and China and we do not know if we can rely on our traditional transatlantic ally to make up the difference. Especially in military terms this is worrying, as America forms the backbone of NATO (by design, despite Trump's constant whining) and a decade of cuts, on the back of a decade of military adventurism, have left the UK armed forces in a precarious position.

In particular there are concerns that the President would use Brexit to advance an economic agenda not only damaging to the UK, but that he personally benefits from. In addition to that, his erratic, personalised style of leadership make him prone to sudden actions that don't fit a usual cost/benefit allowance and he has proven highly susceptible to flattery from some very unwelcome personalities, in lieu of traditional allies who may tell him things he does not want to hear. His slashing of the existing US government bureaucracy and reliance on "acting" heads of department also make it harder for the UK to coordinate action with American counterparts on a wide range of issues.

Iran is also a particular annoyance, as the UK government invested heavily into the negotiations and it was the Americans - not the Iranians - who torpedoed the deal.

I would like to know who leaked these memos, though. It seems calculated to weaken the UK's relationship with America even further.

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Cain on July 07, 2019, 07:25:19 AM
Probably, yes.

While it's worth taking anything in the Daily Mail with a pinch of salt, it should be noted that the former editor has stepped down and the Mail is now trying to fill the "centre-right" market in the UK newspapers, a position that has been vacated over the past decade or so by the Telegraph, which has seen a certain level of improvement in its reporting. Also this has been reported elsewhere.

Part of the ambassador's remit is to observe the political culture in the host country for how it may impact on their state's interests. Trump has been...disquieting for the UK, because he comes at a time when our relationship with Europe is poor, we are under increased pressure from Russia and China and we do not know if we can rely on our traditional transatlantic ally to make up the difference. Especially in military terms this is worrying, as America forms the backbone of NATO (by design, despite Trump's constant whining) and a decade of cuts, on the back of a decade of military adventurism, have left the UK armed forces in a precarious position.

In particular there are concerns that the President would use Brexit to advance an economic agenda not only damaging to the UK, but that he personally benefits from. In addition to that, his erratic, personalised style of leadership make him prone to sudden actions that don't fit a usual cost/benefit allowance and he has proven highly susceptible to flattery from some very unwelcome personalities, in lieu of traditional allies who may tell him things he does not want to hear. His slashing of the existing US government bureaucracy and reliance on "acting" heads of department also make it harder for the UK to coordinate action with American counterparts on a wide range of issues.

Iran is also a particular annoyance, as the UK government invested heavily into the negotiations and it was the Americans - not the Iranians - who torpedoed the deal.

I would like to know who leaked these memos, though. It seems calculated to weaken the UK's relationship with America even further.

See, if I didn't know better, I'd say Trump is running Brexit.
Molon Lube

Cain

Well, you have to remember, 56% of the Tory Party think Trump would make a good Prime Minister, as of a very recent poll, and these are the people Tory MPs have to please in order to keep their jobs.

Trump's an opportunist, and not a very subtle one at that, but he provides cover for our own opportunists who are slightly - though in the grand scheme of things not by much - more subtle than Trump himself.

Assuming that this leak wasn't the result of a "third party" with a preference for vodka and furry hats (which I find unlikely, since the Mail apparently dealt directly with the source), a senior UK politician or member of the civil service (but lets be real here, it's a politician) has leaked information detrimental to the UK's foreign and security policy, undermining the confidential arrangements that ambassadors are presumed to operate under in reporting their observations.

Who would do such a thing?

Well, the article itself gives us some clues. Some people are annoyed at the current ambassador being a "remainer". All of a sudden, there are a slew of articles regarding making Farage the next ambassador to the US - you know, despite no diplomatic experience whatsoever and pursuing a narrow, partisan political objective as opposed to the traditional neutrality of the Civil Service. That's a clue.

Another interesting clue is that, as an employee of the Foreign Office, the Ambassador reported to both the men currently running for Prime Minister. Very likely, whoever succeeds will not include the other in the Cabinet. A senior Tory minister with Americanophile and pro-Trump tendencies could describe either of the men in question quite well. And perhaps they'd like the job for themselves, if not to open it for a preferred candidate of their choosing, should they become Prime Minister shortly.

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Cain on July 08, 2019, 10:08:39 AM
Well, you have to remember, 56% of the Tory Party think Trump would make a good Prime Minister, as of a very recent poll, and these are the people Tory MPs have to please in order to keep their jobs.

Trump's an opportunist, and not a very subtle one at that, but he provides cover for our own opportunists who are slightly - though in the grand scheme of things not by much - more subtle than Trump himself.

Assuming that this leak wasn't the result of a "third party" with a preference for vodka and furry hats (which I find unlikely, since the Mail apparently dealt directly with the source), a senior UK politician or member of the civil service (but lets be real here, it's a politician) has leaked information detrimental to the UK's foreign and security policy, undermining the confidential arrangements that ambassadors are presumed to operate under in reporting their observations.

Who would do such a thing?

Well, the article itself gives us some clues. Some people are annoyed at the current ambassador being a "remainer". All of a sudden, there are a slew of articles regarding making Farage the next ambassador to the US - you know, despite no diplomatic experience whatsoever and pursuing a narrow, partisan political objective as opposed to the traditional neutrality of the Civil Service. That's a clue.

Another interesting clue is that, as an employee of the Foreign Office, the Ambassador reported to both the men currently running for Prime Minister. Very likely, whoever succeeds will not include the other in the Cabinet. A senior Tory minister with Americanophile and pro-Trump tendencies could describe either of the men in question quite well. And perhaps they'd like the job for themselves, if not to open it for a preferred candidate of their choosing, should they become Prime Minister shortly.

Nigel Farage as an ambassador?   :lulz:

Jesus Christ, that's like slapping someone with an iron glove.  It would be interesting to watch Trump decide if he wants to give Farage a blowjob, or have the secret service have him killed, or maybe both.
Molon Lube

Cain

Yeah, though I suspect it's purposefully being put out there so whoever the real candidate is looks sane by comparison.

Doktor Howl

So, how bad is this Kashmir crap gonna get?  I swear, it's like once every century, the entire world goes nationalist as hell and then suddenly Serbia.

I would have thought India would have more sense than this.  I assume this is the Indian president propping himself up.
Molon Lube

Cain

Without Pakistan getting involved, which they genuinely seem loathe to do right now, it's going to be somewhere between an ethnic cleansing and a genocide.

The thing to remember about India is that it's run by Indian, Hindu ultranationalists. Modi infamously encouraged the 2002 Gujarat riots, which "officially"saw 700+ Muslims killed, and unofficially killed a hell of a lot more. Modi was effectively boycotted by the UK and USA after that, including refusing him a visa to visit the US in 2005. That's the calibre of the man now running India.

So Kashmir's a difficult one, because historically there has been ethnic cleansing by Kashmiri militant groups, but the Indian security services have also been operating as de facto death squads in the region in response. We're talking mass graves, rape, torture, disappearances...all that kind of thing.  This was under relatively more benign leadership, and, well, Modi... Not to mention that the Indian Army had a very unsatisfactory standoff with the Chinese only a couple of years ago. I suspect a few generals are thinking they can win some plaudits by bringing home an impressive body count in Kashmir to compensate.

It's going to be bloody.

LMNO

Dear Mr. teh Cain man,

The 45th president of the US is in the process of declaring Mexican drug cartels Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

I'm not sure they should be categorized as terrorists, as I don't believe they have a political agenda, per se.  However, I wanted to get the opinion from someone who know a hell of a lot more about it than I do.

Thoughts?

The Johnny

Quote from: LMNO on November 27, 2019, 07:16:38 PM
Dear Mr. teh Cain man,

The 45th president of the US is in the process of declaring Mexican drug cartels Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

I'm not sure they should be categorized as terrorists, as I don't believe they have a political agenda, per se.  However, I wanted to get the opinion from someone who know a hell of a lot more about it than I do.

Thoughts?

Sorry to butt in, but if that's what it takes to prosecute the ATF for selling high caliber weapons to cartels, Im down.
<<My image in some places, is of a monster of some kind who wants to pull a string and manipulate people. Nothing could be further from the truth. People are manipulated; I just want them to be manipulated more effectively.>>

-B.F. Skinner

Doktor Howl

Quote from: LMNO on November 27, 2019, 07:16:38 PM
Dear Mr. teh Cain man,

The 45th president of the US is in the process of declaring Mexican drug cartels Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

I'm not sure they should be categorized as terrorists, as I don't believe they have a political agenda, per se.  However, I wanted to get the opinion from someone who know a hell of a lot more about it than I do.

Thoughts?

A political agenda isn't required, AFAIK.  An economic terrorist is still a terrorist.

This, however, implies the USA playing monkeyfuck in Mexico on a covert basis.  Which will end well for all concerned.
Molon Lube