@iucrazy2 I would say since 1945, the dems and pubs have been united in their desire to police the world, maybe not publically, but definitely behind the scenes. I an hopeful Trump will be different, as he has stated he wants to stop war. Well, he has brokered several peace deals, but then there's the Iran bombing, which I disagreed with.
So, I am trying to believe this is a new day the the foreign policy arena and maybe Trump can bring peace.
It isn't winning. Muslims are always ready for a peace deal when you are standing on their throat with a sword pointed between their eyes. "Peace" to them is only tactical pauses to rearm and then start the fight again when they feel the chances at victory are more advantageous to them. They were chanting "Khaybar, Khaybar oh you Jews" in the street yesterday.
This wasn't a win, it is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory so that we can repeat this whole episode at some point in the future when the Palestinians carry out another already promised October 7. The only way this is ever going to be over is when the Israelis crush the Palestinians and drive them from the land (if you are secular, if you are religious, it isn't happening until Jesus himself comes back after this conflict has drug the entire world into the abyss...)
My concern with your post was that you made it ostensibly about Palestinians, but at the beginning, you didn't say, "Palestinians are always ready for peace..." You said "Muslims are always ready for peace..." That makes me suspect that, in your mind, even kicking all the Palestinians out of Palestine wouldn't solve the problem; it would just shift it to another locale.
In the press release announcing the winner, the committee noted:
"Democracy is a precondition for lasting peace. However, we live in a world where democracy is in retreat, where more and more authoritarian regimes are challenging norms and resorting to violence. The Venezuelan regime’s rigid hold on power and its repression of the population are not unique in the world. We see the same trends globally: rule of law abused by those in control, free media silenced, critics imprisoned, and societies pushed towards authoritarian rule and militarisation. In 2024, more elections were held than ever before, but fewer and fewer are free and fair."
"When authoritarians seize power, it is crucial to recognise courageous defenders of freedom who rise and resist. Democracy depends on people who refuse to stay silent, who dare to step forward despite grave risk, and who remind us that freedom must never be taken for granted, but must always be defended – with words, with courage and with determination." ... There is little need to read between the lines there. (bolded emphasis added by me).
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
The Nobel Prize Committee chairman was asked directly about Trump’s efforts to bully the Committee into giving him the prize.
reporter: “U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly said he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize and he'd like to have it. He even said that it would be an insult to the United States if he doesn't get it. What do you, as the chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, think of this and how has this campaign-like activity by the president and his supporters, domestically and internationally, affected the deliberations and the thinking in the committee?”
The chairman replied: “This committee sits in a room filled with the portraits of all laureates and that room is filled with both courage and integrity. So we base our decisions on their works and the will of Alfred Nobel.”
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
The Nobel Prize Committee chairman was asked directly about Trump’s efforts to bully the Committee into giving him the prize.
reporter: “U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly said he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize and he'd like to have it. He even said that it would be an insult to the United States if he doesn't get it. What do you, as the chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, think of this and how has this campaign-like activity by the president and his supporters, domestically and internationally, affected the deliberations and the thinking in the committee?”
The chairman replied: “This committee sits in a room filled with the portraits of all laureates and that room is filled with both courage and integrity. So we base our decisions on their works and the will of Alfred Nobel.”
@shooter Yet, this year's winner, who knows first hand what an authoritarian regime looks like, thanked Trump for his support in COMBATING an authoritarian regime and DEDICATED the award to him. I think I will give her opinion more weight than anyone else.
"We are on the threshold of victory and today," she wrote, "more than ever, we count on President Trump, the people of the United States, the peoples of Latin America, and the democratic nations of the world as our principal allies to achieve Freedom and democracy. I dedicate this prize to the suffering people of Venezuela and to President Trump for his decisive support of our cause!"
@shooter Yet, this year's winner, who knows first hand what an authoritarian regime looks like, thanked Trump for his support in COMBATING an authoritarian regime and DEDICATED the award to him. I think I will give her opinion more weight than anyone else.
"We are on the threshold of victory and today," she wrote, "more than ever, we count on President Trump, the people of the United States, the peoples of Latin America, and the democratic nations of the world as our principal allies to achieve Freedom and democracy. I dedicate this prize to the suffering people of Venezuela and to President Trump for his decisive support of our cause!"
I love what this thread has become. We’ve had peace in the ME for maybe 24 hours, so now we’re fighting about Nobel Peace prizes. Humans suck. Lol
If Obama deserved one, then Trump does too. Simple as that. However, I agreed with Obama when he said US presidents shouldn’t be nominated as more often than not they act in the interests of the US. Sometimes they’ll look like agents of Peace and other times they’ll look like Grim Reapers. That’s the job.
The good news is that American’s of every political stripe can take pride in the efforts that went into this cease fire. The administrations of Democrats and old guard Republicans helped build Israel up and isolated Iran. They argued about the details but the general effort was sustained, allowing the Populist Republicans to take the ball and dunk it. Yet another reminder that US foreign policy is bigger than any single Presidency.
In the press release announcing the winner, the committee noted:
"Democracy is a precondition for lasting peace. However, we live in a world where democracy is in retreat, where more and more authoritarian regimes are challenging norms and resorting to violence. The Venezuelan regime’s rigid hold on power and its repression of the population are not unique in the world. We see the same trends globally: rule of law abused by those in control, free media silenced, critics imprisoned, and societies pushed towards authoritarian rule and militarisation. In 2024, more elections were held than ever before, but fewer and fewer are free and fair."
"When authoritarians seize power, it is crucial to recognise courageous defenders of freedom who rise and resist. Democracy depends on people who refuse to stay silent, who dare to step forward despite grave risk, and who remind us that freedom must never be taken for granted, but must always be defended – with words, with courage and with determination." ... There is little need to read between the lines there. (bolded emphasis added by me).
I don’t think you,( or most pundits) know what authoritarian even means. You are conflating decisiveness with authoritarianism. Trump is very decisive. Not only is he decisive, his decisions are such that they up set the apple cart of what has become normalcy. Blowing up fast-boats full of drugs heading our way is an example. That is a consequential decision, and a new exercise of Presidential authority, but it isn’t evidence of being an authoritarian because the decision is within his Article II powers. More lawsuits have been brought against Trump than any other president. Almost all those cases test his Article II authority. There is no way on God’s green earth that Trump can ever be authoritarian. He can never escape the limits of Article II.
I don’t think you,( or most pundits) know what authoritarian even means. You are conflating decisiveness with authoritarianism. Trump is very decisive. Not only is he decisive, his decisions are such that they up set the apple cart of what has become normalcy. Blowing up fast-boats full of drugs heading our way is an example. That is a consequential decision, and a new exercise of Presidential authority, but it isn’t evidence of being an authoritarian because the decision is within his Article II powers. More lawsuits have been brought against Trump than any other president. Almost all those cases test his Article II authority. There is no way on God’s green earth that Trump can ever be authoritarian. He can never escape the limits of Article II.
I don't get this. Under your reasoning, no president can ever be more or less authoritarian than another. That's clearly wrong. You can call authoritarian decisions or actions decisive too (they can be both, right?), but that doesn't mean actions like overreaching executive orders, military adventurism without Congressional authority, or suspending habeas corpus (hi, Mr. Lincoln) can't be authoritarian.
To me, the better argument is that our presidents have always acted on a spectrum of authoritarianism--usually dictated by the particular problems of the day, political will to allow it, electoral power of the politician, etc.--and that's not a bad thing. Good arguments can be made that in certain times, we need a a president who will push the edges of the delegated powers to get stuff done. Maybe Trump is justified in what he is doing, maybe not. But screaming "He's authoritarian!" is just more shallow, unserious whining.
I don’t get this. Under your reasoning, no president can ever be more or less authoritarian than another. That’s clearly wrong.
That’s not what I said. No president can exceed the bounds of article II authority. At least not on an ongoing basis. I think what you are saying some presidents are more decisive than others, some depend on consensus more than others, and some are more aggressive with article Ii authority than others. I agree with all of that, but so long as the president stays within his constitutional authority, I don’t think the president can be seen as authoritarian.
Lincoln, of course, is a different case. War and Marshall law changes the calculus.
One of the most authoritarian actions by a president in this century was Biden’s bellyaching about the Georgia election law. Georgia has plenary authority about Georgia voting. Biden’s bullying on that issue had real consequences, MLB moved the all star game in the year Hank Aaron was to be honored. That was authoritarian.
