President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[USUC]

If we're buying Greenland then I'm ok with it. We should have invaded northern Mexico and kicked ass on the cartels years ago.

I see this sentiment a fair amount from conservatives. But I don't think it's a very well thought out position from many. The cartels are heavily armed and enmeshed with the local populations. Sure, air strikes can do damage on cartel mansions, but a ground war would be necessary and the US would sustain a lot of casualties. Would it be worth it?

[Northwestcoug]

We should have invaded northern Mexico and kicked ass on the cartels years ago.

I could have sworn I saw this movie and it's many sequels in the last few decades. Reviews were mixed to poor.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I would love to hear Uncle Ted's take on these proposals to invade and overtake countries.

[LVAllen]

I would love to hear Uncle Ted's take on these proposals to invade and overtake countries.

Sounds very libertarian.

[Maximus]

so what does denmark do if trump says 100% tariffs unless you sell? how about panama.

[LVAllen]

so what does denmark do if trump says 100% tariffs unless you sell? how about panama.

I bet the boomers will get a kick out of higher drug prices because of tariffs on medicine (half of the $12B in imports from Denmark were pharmaceuticals).

[Shaka]

I see this sentiment a fair amount from conservatives. But I don't think it's a very well thought out position from many. The cartels are heavily armed and enmeshed with the local populations. Sure, air strikes can do damage on cartel mansions, but a ground war would be necessary and the US would sustain a lot of casualties. Would it be worth it?

Has the all the carnage the cartels have caused been worth it? I think we could get the non-corrupt Mexican politicians on-board that would keep their army out of it. I'd wager we have the intelligence too root them out where they are quickly and effectively.

[Northwestcoug]

I see that Trump's obvious reason for the fires (not turning off the spigot to save the delta smelt - can't believe I wrote that) has become GOP talking points within a day. No less than Mike Lee parroted the same thing.

Trump thinking he understands everything better than experts in any field, publicly claiming that, and the sycophants you think should know better parroting his insanity? That's a 9 on the crazy level.

[BlueK]

I see that Trump's obvious reason for the fires (not turning off the spigot to save the delta smelt - can't believe I wrote that) has become GOP talking points within a day. No less than Mike Lee parroted the same thing.

Trump thinking he understands everything better than experts in any field, publicly claiming that, and the sycophants you think should know better parroting his insanity? That's a 9 on the crazy level.

It's not going to go well. Last time he had some sane people around him checking his worst impulses. It doesn't appear that will happen this time. Buckle up.

[Jeff Lebowski]

In fairness, the long term damage they are doing to the Central Valley aquifer to save the delta smelt is insane.

[Northwestcoug]

In fairness, the long term damage they are doing to the Central Valley aquifer to save the delta smelt is insane.

I'm glad you entered the chat. From my understanding, the current water situation (reservoir levels, lack of water pressure in hydrants, etc.) in southern California is not dependent on the northern water supply/aquifer. The problems both regions face share common causes but they are 'physically' distinct. Is that true?

I've interpreted Trump's statements on increasing California fires as being based on some localized disputed fact, yet wildly extrapolated to any water problem in the entire state.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I'm glad you entered the chat. From my understanding, the current water situation (reservoir levels, lack of water pressure in hydrants, etc.) in southern California is not dependent on the northern water supply/aquifer. The problems both regions face share common causes but they are 'physically' distinct. Is that true?

I've interpreted Trump's statements on increasing California fires as being based on some localized disputed fact, yet wildly extrapolated to any water problem in the entire state.

Correct. The delta smelt has nothing to do with the municipal water distribution system in Los Angeles.

You can also ignore the idiots pointing to all the water in the ocean as an option. You have to be able to move the water. And putting sea water in your freshwater system would destroy it. Not to mention it would take lots of infrastructure that isn't there and under normal circumstances there is zero reason for it to be there.

[falafel]

Has the all the carnage the cartels have caused been worth it? I think we could get the non-corrupt Mexican politicians on-board that would keep their army out of it. I'd wager we have the intelligence too root them out where they are quickly and effectively.

I think you would be wrong.

First of all, how do you identify the "non-corrupt" politicians? They aren't out there advertising that they are on the take. Second, if you think all that is stopping Mexico from rooting out the cartels is a lack of military power or money, you don't understand Mexico or the cartels.

[frank ryan]

I see this sentiment a fair amount from conservatives. But I don't think it's a very well thought out position from many. The cartels are heavily armed and enmeshed with the local populations. Sure, air strikes can do damage on cartel mansions, but a ground war would be necessary and the US would sustain a lot of casualties. Would it be worth it?

It's an awful idea and is hard to take seriously from those who gave Trump credibility as a peacemaker. Mexico, in a word is complicated. There are diplomatic, economic, intelligence, military, law enforcement and other entanglements to consider.

My biggest qualms with Trump have always been national security. This talk further validates that.

It's a good way to unify the cartels and state against a common enemy. We are dependent on Mexico for so many goods. The sloganistic crackdown on illegal immigration will already deal us some unintended economic blows.

This is a great way and justifiable reason to shove Mexico into China's arms. We do share intel with them. That will stop. The cartels are organizationally ready and capable of long-term low intensity guerrilla warfare. It won't be contained to their borders.
It would make what happened in Iraq look like a joke and we would become a pariah.

It's just the right wing media, but also the mainstream media that runs around and Trump to make sense of stupid shit Trump sense, treating like he is insightful and thoughtful.

Couple this with voiding a legit treaty we made with Panama and bully a reliable ally in Panama, it's like he is to make America like up to its worst stereotype.

And if you don't think part of American security and prosperity was the result of a series of mutually beneficial alliances, and not bullying other nations, you are sorely mistaken.

But again neither his party nor his acolytes and grifter in the right wing will put him in check. Bannon is already touting Trump running in 28. That needs to be shot down. Because that is a signal of what they will try to do.

[Shaka]

Correct. The delta smelt has nothing to do with the municipal water distribution system in Los Angeles.

You can also ignore the idiots pointing to all the water in the ocean as an option. You have to be able to move the water. And putting sea water in your freshwater system would destroy it. Not to mention it would take lots of infrastructure that isn't there and under normal circumstances there is zero reason for it to be there.

Dumping seawater on almost anything will start immediate corrosion and wreck it. Even marine rated wire and electronics will ultimately fail as salt water finds itself into them. This is why boats that sink in the ocean, even if pulled up quickly, will usually be written off as complete losses. Salt water would be hell on a house.