What do liberals believe is Donald Trump’s greatest achievement as president and in life?
Donald’s great achievement for the Republicans has been is 2017 Tax Cuts. This was a big deal. Unfortunately, he will still be alive when the cost of this comes to be paid and his great achievement will become a liability.Donald’s lasting great achievement will be the reorganization of the GOP. The GOP started having a change of values and what was important when the Tea Party was formed. The GOP has a great voter base but it is aging out and dying. By Donald Trump being such a polarizing President then the GOP can attract new voters and evolve into a reenergized party. There might be a bunch of complaining and it will come with a cost for some people. However it is needed every few decades to keep a political party in existence.Donald Trump’s biggest gift for the Democrats was going after ObamaCare. It has been the biggest game changer for health care and the Democrats being the good guys. For years too, too many people were happy to use ACA and not realize it was ObamaCare. When the Republicans threatened so many people all across the country it changed America and Americans. The change of attitude about health care helped to make the “Blue Wave” of 2018 possible. Between Trump/GOP going after people’s healthcare and the Koch brother’s project to prove that Medicare for All would be expensive. These events has proven that Medicare for All would be cheaper and better for Americans. We might end up with Medicare for All or a Single Payer Health Care in a few years.Thanks to the Koch Brothers, We Have More Proof that Single Payer Saves Money and Cares for All of Us
Why do people think America invaded Iraq for it being responsible for 9/11?
Too many people failed to understand why George HW Bush would not let H. Norman Schwarzkopf take Baghdad.After 9/11 people lost their minds a little bit. We collectively freaked out and a certain geopolitical philosophy used that chaos to advance an agenda.Basically we did invade because of 9/11. Even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Al Quaeda was a stateless entity but if it had a home, it was in Saudi Arabia.We could not invade Saudi Arabia. We did not want to invade Afghanistan, which is historically problematic. We wanted somewhere to fight and it ended up being Iraq.It was ground to engage an amorphous entity away from our shores. A location that control offered advantages in the long term.The GWB Administration never said that Iraq was directly linked to Al Quaeda or 9/11 but the repeatedly implied that it was so.America digested and internalized that implication and it is now firmly rooted in our psyche.We blew up Iraq because of 9/11.A massive misstep certainly but the events are tied together.The issue here is that Iraq was used as an experiment in future warfare against an asymmetric enemy. Instead of the old school overwhelming force doctrine. Iraq was a geostrategic choice. Saddam Hussein had repeatedly attempted to undermine the PetroDollar. Hussein was also playing a dangerous game of trying to Telegraph a WMD program to cow his neighbors. Finally he bordered Iran opposite of Afghanistan.Iran was the real goal.The NeoCon political philosophy grossly miscalculated the Sunni/Sh’ia divide and the need for a strong central power in Baghdad that was not an outsider. They also underestimated how effective Iran could be in its external counterinsurgency operations.So we invaded Iraq for a multitude of reasons but a direct tie to 9/11 wasn’t actually one of them. 9/11 however is a focus for our National Psyche so the invasion of a country so soon thereafter will always tie the two together.That tie is legitimate too.The invasion would not have happened without 9/11. The People weren’t really motivated for this sort of thing. Israel was in no greater danger than it had been. Iran was just another bad actor. The Bond Market was in no great existential crisis. Oil markets were stable.We the People were hoping to enjoy the Peace Dividend at the end of the Cold War. 9/11 brought that to a screeching halt.
Why was the APARTHIED regime not TRIED by the HAGUE?
I think the International Criminal Court of Justice (ICC) is set up to investigate international crimes which could not be dealt with by the countries involved. One would have thought that the Hague will be more interested in fairnes and consistent justice. I may be ignorant but I would like to ask a few questions. 1. Saddam Hussien was handed over to the courts in his own country Iraq for what the world called justice. Though the architects of the capture somehow oppossed to death panalty. Why didn't the ICC try the UK-US - Iraq war though USUK killed more people than Saddam? 2. Many thousands of indigenous South Africans (Rhodesia) suffered extreme torture and death over many decades in the hands of ''White Settlers'' but after the poor 'blacks' gained independence and the supposed to try the Botha and the de Clerks the West quickly aggitated for RECONCILIATION instead of seeking Justice. Why couldn't the ICC step in to call for answers as they are calling now for the Sudannese president? 3. Are there no courts in Sudan or indeed in Africa that can competently try the Sudan President as the US-UK did to Saddam? 4. Is RECONCILIATION only meant for Black-White Justice? 5. Is there any crime against humanity that is worst than the SLAVE TRADE? where those hid under the cloak of christianity captured Africans, chained them in hundreds, threw the weak and dying ones into the seas, built forts and castles with dungeons to imprison the slaves. 6. Are we seeing a case of the survival of the FITTEST? 7. Are we seeing new western imperialism? Or NEO-COLONIALISM? I rest my case.
Is John McCain a war hero?
Donald trump makes a good point. Should we really be calling someone a hero just because they were captured. I have never been in military and I am tired of everybody given them undue credit. It's not like they did it for free, so it's not selfless.