President Trump may have flown off the handle and canceled eight months of Afghan peace talks on a whim this weekend, but most of the media and political criticism of him is centering not on that, but rather for having planned to meet with Taliban negotiators at Camp David.
While Camp David has historically been a place for peace talks, media reports are deeply critical of the idea of inviting the Taliban there, reflectively in no small part of their general opposition to the peace process that was to go with the talks.
Lawmakers, once they sensed this was a good issue to get some media coverage on, went after Trump for the date of the meeting, which they say was “9/11 weekend,” even though historically 9/11 (which is Wednesday) has never been treated as encompassing a weekend.
Some are arguing Camp David is too “prestigious” for the Taliban to be allowed in. Others suggested anger over 9/11 should mean the Taliban never get talks at all. The idea that talks in and of themselves are a “reward” from the US was similarly echoed in opposition to North Korea talks.
Trump has defended the idea of meeting people to negotiate as an important part of diplomacy, though his willingness to see that through to the end is somewhat limited. Ultimately, Trump ditched the process, and the media is still fuming over the idea that officials almost met with the Taliban, but ultimately did not.
Standard partisan bs, no big deal.
True. But it may be a big deal when it becomes a way of life. The resulting total gridlock and paralysis means no decisions can be made on any issue. Only the unelected bureaucrats today craft and manage regulations, but it is hard to tell if they are only working within the framework of existing laws — or are essentially creatively reinterpreting laws, and effectively legislating under the table. In the meantime, media snd social media are effectively crumbling down what is left of civilized behavior, encouraging extremes and rewarding stupidity. This is not a fertile soil for the advancements in science and technology. We take all of our prosperity for granted, yet it can be destroyed by a few generations of incompetence, silliness and arrogance. And unless we asses realistically our current strengths and weaknesses, moving forward will be chaotic and random.
What you say is true, partisan gridlock is a problem, particularly the use of filibuster in the Senate. That is not what this story represents. Anytime any politician decides to do anything, you can count on a couple of critics in the media to point out what they don’t like about it. That’s what I mean, standard bs. The important story, why aren’t the details of the peace deal available, and why aren’t those points debated in an open senate forum.
Peace would mean certain elites relinquishing control and or power.
Once again, we see the people on top so desperate to stay on top they will sacrifice everyone and everything.
It’s pretty much us or them at this point. I can’t remember anyone marching in the streets demanding the covert actions that brought about the blow-back that resulted in this war of terror……
“anyone marching in the streets”…I guess the reality is, marching against covert actions we barely know about is difficult. Many marched against the Iraq war worldwide, obviously not enough. Keep in mind, prior to John Brown, less than 5% of (whites) identified as abolitionist. Unfortunately, a third of our neighbors support and rally behind US militancy. Of course many of our neighbors believed “The Apprentice” was something worth spending their time watching.
“Many marched against the Iraq war worldwide, obviously not enough.”
I don’t think it’s a function of numbers, at least in the US. It’s a function of what those numbers represent.
Maya Angelou wrote a poem, “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.” A modern history of the US state might be titled “I Know Why Our Rulers Don’t Give a Damn That the Caged Bird Sings.”
Since the end of Vietnam, you can get as many people as you want to out for a rally or march, and everyone chants a bunch of stuff and goes home and pouts because the authoritahs didn’t even deign to notice.
The authoritahs don’t deign to notice because they have good reason to believe the protesters are going to go home and pout instead of, say, taking the authoritahs out back and putting bullets in the backs of their heads.
When the authoritahs get scared of THAT kind of thing actually happening, then they’ll deign to pay attention.
“as many people as you want” ok, 10 million surrounding the Congress, White House and Pentagon. General strike and mass demonstration are the only way to put a stop to US militancy. Numbers matter. Even a modest mortgage/rent strike could shut down our finance system, and force the government to listen. Even our police and military live under the thumb of the banking system. There is a finite number which collapses the system. Course, anyone able to organize a 1000 people for such a strike, wouldn’t live to see it enacted.
Now, the beauty of a mortgage/rent strike is how well it fits into the american fabric. Everyone can continue to work and provide services. No one has to march, simply turn off automatic payments, or, don’t send checks. It could be done for a limited period, as a warning. With many police joining, it may be a problem for the system to project power into the people. Congressional fundraising would stop, and they would be forced to address grievances. Then what ?
Yes, a general strike of some sort would bring things to a head, if it got sufficient buy-in.
But no number of people surrounding the Capitol, etc. would work if the people inside believed that the people outside were just going to wave some signs, have some chants, and then go home and wait to see if they get what they wanted and complain if they didn’t.
Our politicians have learned that they can make promises then deliver pale shadows of those promises and still get re-elected. And they feel safe as houses.
Even 30 years ago, a congresscritter occasionally got chased down the street by people throwing eggs and rocks. Now they’re protected from even being booed at their pre-fab events. They don’t think that consequences apply to them.
except when this guy turned up https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/23ecbdd48e233aad2778fd22d7b1ea713537d1cca1711fc83fcd30ee62cdb02e.jpg
“Only the unelected bureaucrats today craft and manage regulations, but
it is hard to tell if they are only working within the framework of
existing laws — or are essentially creatively reinterpreting laws, and
effectively legislating under the table.”
Actually they are sold to the highest bidder among the elite capitalist crowd who also own the media.
We are not moving forward due to the fact capitalism hates competition and therefor hinders progress until the same usual suspects are able to claim new ideas as their own and charge everyone rent for them.
Certainly the major problem with the warfare state is its enactment of secrecy. The information age might have worried them briefly, yet they learned computers in the end, are a centralizing system. Own the program, own the information. Robotics and drones will eliminate more (lessor) human involvement in war prosecution..those dang soldiers could possibly spill the beans, or turn against you, tho, our praetorians seem quite compliant. The concept of motion activated machine guns on border walls is particularly disgusting, and portends worse for the future.
You can’t have almost twenty years of propagandizing the Taliban as “terrorists” and then not expect anybody to look at them coming into our country as anything but a travesty. I’m not sure if this wasn’t all planned to get the public all riled up so our continuance of this never ending debacle can grind on.