- Date published:
8:01 am, June 2nd, 2017 - 213 comments
Categories: climate change, Donald Trump, Environment, global warming, International, us politics, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:
It is official.
Donald Trump has announced that America will be withdrawing from the Paris Accord.
From Radio New Zealand:
Donald Trump has confirmed he will withdraw the US from the Paris climate change agreement …
Mr Trump said the Paris agreement disadvantaged the United States, and that he hoped to seek “a better deal”.
“We’re getting out”, he said.
“The United States will withdraw from the Paris climate accord but begin negotiations to re-enter either the Paris accord or an entirely new transaction, on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers.”
The action appears to be in part to provide Trump with another reason to abuse Barack Obama who had pledged to reduce US greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28% of 2005 levels by 2025. The world’s future should not be threatened by an old man acting in a fit of pique.
This may show how isolated Trump and America is. There has been a surge of investment in clean energy and clean transport and apart from Syria and Nicaragua and now the US the rest of the world realise how important an issue this is. And when Florida starts succumbing to rising sea levels I suspect all hell will break loose. But as a planet we are already at the point of no return and if Trump does affect America’s response then future generations will curse him.
Finally a scene from the Planet of the Apes which sums things up well.
Barack Obama has released this statement. Hopefully America will ignore its current President rather than follow him.
A year and a half ago, the world came together in Paris around the first-ever global agreement to set the world on a low-carbon course and protect the world we leave to our children.
“It was steady, principled American leadership on the world stage that made that achievement possible. It was bold American ambition that encouraged dozens of other nations to set their sights higher as well. And what made that leadership and ambition possible was America’s private innovation and public investment in growing industries like wind and solar — industries that created some of the fastest new streams of good-paying jobs in recent years, and contributed to the longest streak of job creation in our history.
“Simply put, the private sector already chose a low-carbon future. And for the nations that committed themselves to that future, the Paris Agreement opened the floodgates for businesses, scientists, and engineers to unleash high-tech, low-carbon investment and innovation on an unprecedented scale.
“The nations that remain in the Paris Agreement will be the nations that reap the benefits in jobs and industries created. I believe the United States of America should be at the front of the pack. But even in the absence of American leadership; even as this Administration joins a small handful of nations that reject the future; I’m confident that our states, cities, and businesses will step up and do even more to lead the way, and help protect for future generations the one planet we’ve got.”
What was not going to work, now definitely never going to work, wreaked by idiots and fools.
Yeah it was pretty obvious this was coming. When they have to show him pictures to get him through a basic briefing, science might just be above his level of comprehension.
Outstanding. It takes great courage to fly in the face of popular opinion. If there was one promise I wanted Trump to keep, this is it. we’re going to see a definitive change of culture to what is an essential trace gas CO2.
Donald Trump – Making America Grate Again.
And motivating large numbers, in the US and elsewhere, to step up the action on climate.
Stupid little man.
Good coverage by the Washington Post.
Best thing to happen to the climate change movement ever.
The Untied States joins those not in the club: Nicaragua and Syria.
But the rest of the world, the entire activist base, and all those industries, customers, and entrepeneurs working towards a lower carbon world, just got the best unifying mechanism ever: someone to hate.
Best thing to happen to the climate change movement.
Hard to hate an idiot, and a fool.
But yeah, does put the USA on the outta.
It’s one simple stroke that turns climate change into a Lord of the Rings saga.
The whole movement needed a Lord Sauron – and so he reveals on cue.
Trump just needs to stay the full term to continue unifying the world.
Yeah like Hitler unified the world – he hasn’t helped mitigate climate change or activated the activists – they are already activated – trump has hindered us all.
So early, so Godwin!
It’s the connection and unifying purpose this gives to activists, governments, customers, business, NGOs, and peak bodies like the UN that will be the winning of this.
But they need the yank leadership and money not a figurehead to hate on. This is serous mate not some intellectual game.
No, they don’t need the US at all. The EU-China statement in response shapes this new international climate leadership.
Yep, the world can do without the US and it’s time that the world told the US that in no uncertain terms.
Oh – i stand corrected I suppose. Can’t see, if that is the case, why so many are so upset – thoughts?
IMO, it’s because we’ve woven the idea of the US being the Western Leader into our culture so much that people still expect to follow where they lead. They haven’t, yet, figured out that the US hasn’t been a leader for a long time, that they’re actually holding the world back, and that the rest of us don’t have to follow them anyway.
There’s no need to get upset with what the US does – just stop trading with them and annul all debt between them and the rest of the world.
Have to say I generally agree with Ad on this one. Make the US irrelevant. It’s not like Obama’s commitment was in any way adequate any way. The rest of the world should galvinise and get on with doing the right thing. And what Draco said re trading. Time to start looking at economic and political sanctions on the US.
Trump is now free to shake the world down any time we want to do something he can literally put his foot – militarily speaking – and say yeah, how much you gonna pay for me to play ball.
That is in the end all that Trump is a Mobster, a Con Man.
Anyone who still believes that there is a democratic republic has not watched the news since Jan. 21. 2017.
The world does not need to the US to start doing their thing, look at the Netherlands, look at Germany and various other countries that have invested in renewable energy for decades now, but the world does not want the US to turn into a Mafia State either.
That is why it would be nice if they would play ball with us rather then try to hold our ball hostage.
Progressive states within the US like California will continue to move to sustainable energy production.
The Global Warming Hoax | Lord Monckton and Stefan Molyneux …
Video for lord monck disproves climate change you tube▶ 1:33:22
The Paris accord should invite California and a few other states in the US.
The really daft thing about this is that the coal miners and oil men he is trying to pander to are steadily becoming uneconomic from new technologies like solat, wind and lithium batteries anyway. Consequently they are automating the jobs out of existence in search of viable profit margins. Doesn’t help trumps constituency.
The first of the Washington Post links in 3 above list states and cities that might take independent action: “In states such as California and New York, Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, Illinois and North Carolina, and in New England; in cities such as New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston and New Orleans, among many others. ”
“BREAKING: CA, NY and WA governors reject Pres. Trump’s decision; will convene alliance of US states that want to uphold climate agreement”
Two states to invite Texas and California. Both have growing movements to go remove themselves from the republic.
If California exited the USA, that would probably make Trump supporters very happy – there would never be a Democrat president again. Plus California is choked by debt.
Texas is an interesting case, because the push for independence there is driven by those most sympathetic towards Nationalistic politics, they see the Federal Government as the enemy of the people and so want rid of it – hardly a Progressive position. Though at the moment Texans maybe hoping that Trump really will “drain the swamp”.
After all the RWNJ policy which is now being reversed as the people of California realise that it was all a lie.
They won’t have completed the withdrawal until the day after the next presidential election.
And if Trump isn’t president by then…
There’s 147 countries that have ratified the Paris Agreement. Those 147 countries now need to get together and stop trading with any country that hasn’t ratified it – especially the US.
Lets see how well their economy goes when nobody trades with them.
According to the US this is a valid tactic.
NZ has ratified it. What is our government doing to honour it?
Our governments doing pretty much nothing. It’s going to take a change of government to get anything done on it.
But at least we do have goals because of the agreement and we have ratified it. It’s a start.
“It’s going to take a change of government to get anything done on it.”
The last Labour government did not do anything, with emissions rising rapidly right through the first decade of the century. The next Labour government will do nothing either.
Trump’s withdrawal does not matter. USA emissions (unlike New Zealand’s!) are declining rapidly. That is driven by markets, not the USA Government. In contrast, Germany’s emissions are now also rising rapidly.
Don’t worry about it. By contrast, Trump’s withdrawal from the TPP – that WAS damaging, and yet I recall no concern expressed by you on that. Worry about real problems.
The last Labour government didn’t do enough but they did sign us on to the Kyoto Protocol which National wouldn’t have.
The next Labour government will probably do something more than National.
Need citations on Germanies riding emissions.
The TPP would have made us worse off.
Giving 1.4 billion annually a year for 10 years I had thought. Is the spending of this money monitored in any way? China and India don’t need to start making good on their promises until 2030 if what I have read is correct. Trump is just doing what he said he was going to do. Heaven forbid. There is science to suggest that the sun largely controls the earth’s temperature and there ain’t much we can do about it. I believe humans are massively polluting our beautiful planet but not so sure about the whole carbon climate change thing. Perhaps that 1.4 billion would be better spent here buying back some of our largely foreign owned forestry and ensuring we continue to plant trees.
“According to the US this is a valid tactic.”
When you are the super power, yes it works. Not sure otherwise…
this is part of the problem. People think that we should treat countries differently when we shouldn’t. The US is just another country and should be treated the same way. If trade sanctions work on the DPRK to try and get them to stop them having nukes, despite there being no legal basis for such action, then using the same on the US to get them in line on climate change is valid as well.
And please note: All those sanctions that the US got put in place were global sanctions. Just not being able to trade with the US is meaningless. Same goes for the US. If the US can’t trade with the rest of the world guess who’s going to buckle first.
I was on the “Better trump than hillary but damn both of them to hell” spectrum until a week or so after he won the election. Now….. I know I was wrong and well i guess America got what it deserved.
Can the mods please let CV back so we can see the contortions he has to go through to refuse to admit he got it wrong? I don’t see how anyone can defend this
Clinton would have saved us.. yeah right:
You misrepresent CV.
His often stated position on this is that there would be barely a few ppm difference between Trump pulling out of Paris, and the establishment machine under Hillary continuing to pretend and extend. In that I think he was perfectly correct.
He’s also on record as saying that even Paris was not enough, that a carbon price in excess of $100/ton was the kind of radical starting point we needed.
I’d suggest CV was in the same rather broad corner as myself and Ad; that Trump should never be underestimated because his chaotic impact would break up the existing stalemate created by neo-liberalism. Basically the way he saw it was a choice between the certainty of ‘stuck with business as usual’ under Clinton, or the possibility of change under Trump.
But emphatically that doesn’t necessarily translate into meaning that any of us support Trump in a positive sense. I read this news much sadness and some anger this morning; it’s absolutely appalling and indefensible. Yet as so many others have observed, a world utterly addicted to fossil fuels has miserably failed to make the dramatic changes needed. Instead, as the inexorably rise of CO2 levels proves, we’ve prevaricated, denied and lied to ourselves. We’ve made a pretense at therapy, yet doubled down on our destructive behaviors.
All addicts face a choice; accept the truth of their addiction and take responsibility for real change … OR deny until they hit rock-bottom and have it forced on them. As Ad so eloquently puts it, every action has a reaction and Trump pulling out of the Paris Accord may well force the inevitable process of change. It just won’t be a dull ride anymore.
Sorry, i perhaps wan’t clear about how i was referring to CV. On all your points, i agree with you. Entirely. It was more an overall referral to trump.
Fair enough. In many ways CV is his own worst enemy. He’s very smart, well informed guy and frankly I always liked him. But all too often he just didn’t quite know when to stop typing his way up too many noses.
He forgot that you don’t shit where you eat.
Please Sir Red Logix.
We didn’t pump CO2 into our glasshouses at supposed 600 pmm for no reason.
We pumped it into those glasshouses to increase the speed of growth, to increase the yield, and increase the labour force but mainly, to make a increase in our bank account.
CO2 levels in our atmosphere speeds up the growth in pine plantations and native forests, CO2 is not a bogey if you want a increase in yield.
Can you eat pine plantations? No? Oh, well I guess you look like a bit of a pillock then, eh.
But at least I provided a wage for your father who then paid for your University Fees.
oh no the high co2 as a positive bullshit , that fool doug edmeades was pushing that line in a farming mag recently
Can the mods please let CV back
I believe that CV’s exile is voluntary.
Nope, he picked up a ban until after the election – for lying about the reason for his previous ban IIRC.
Sometimes exchanges can work under circumstances like this. Somebody could talk to someone that knows Slater. Put out some feelers and see if the Whale would consider unbanning James.
I’m kidding James, you bring colour, Viva la difference.
So when you were on your “better Trump than……etc” did you not listen to what he said he was going to do when in power? That aside did you honestly believe Trump would continue with the US as part of the Paris accord? He could have said anything he wanted and any semi intelligent person would have still known that he would remove the US from the Paris accord.
Seems to me Trump is trying to follow through on the things he said he would??
Have all you guys (people) on the other part of the left (Yes there is definitely a divide) still not figured out why Trump won yet? And if you have then surely you can see how this is a great political move by Trump in terms of shoring up support in the millions who used to vote left but voted for him instead this time round?
You could say (as you have done) that America got what it deserved. Most people in America would say America got what it democratically voted for. Trump won. Get over it for fucks sake!
CV predicted a Trump win and gave valid reasoning. Seems he was right about that so why would he admit he was wrong?
Trump did say in his speech that he would renegotiate for a Climate change agreement. Maybe a face saving act so that he can say he withdrew as promised now make a new deal with a few new bits in it.
Trump did say in his speech that he would renegotiate for a Climate change agreement.
I would go along with that ianmac if I thought for one moment Trump was intellectually sane and capable of honesty. But he’s not. He’s a climate change denier full stop. He probably thinks Climatology is something to do with climbing mountains.
Somebody here says: don’t underestimate Trump. True. Like many thick-headed buffoons he’s as cunning as a rat and too many people are fooled into mistaking it for cleverness.
France, Italy and Germany governments said Paris Climate Accord cannot be renegotiated.
Thanks Carolyn_nth. Good to hear.
Yet another example of his dishonest, thick-headed bullish behaviour.
Wow, the leaders of 3 countries say it so therefore it is. I think what they mean is that they won’t renegotiate for whatever reason is valid for them.
As far as any other countries go, any contract or agreement at any level can “be renegotiated”. Besides, Paris is an accord, or agreement. to say a democratically elected government who is opposed to the previous one can’t disagree with whatever agreements were put in place is like giving the middle finger to the American people and saying “fuck you, you cant change!”
I guess they just haven’t grasped it yet either..
I’m probably what you would (in your own words) call a “climate change denier”. According to you (even though you don’t know me in any way whatsoever) I am also therefore, insane and a compulsive liar.
I guess you could argue that that’s not necessarily a lie, more likely just an ignorant position to take but i reckon it’s sure as shit insane!
You and those like you just don’t get it do ya..
I think that putting in “also” means that you think they are two different things.
They are not.
Anyone who discounts the overwhelming consensus of hundreds of thousands of specialists in the field, any field, is likely delusional and/or dishonest.
It’s like saying “I stole the mona lisa, so according to you (even though you don’t know me in any way whatsoever) I’m also a thief or a liar”.
I don’t get your argument sorry but am guessing you agree that someone who ‘denies’ the out of control man made global warming theory is by definition insane and a liar. I would say they just have a different point of view.
And your post would suggest that you think the word “consensus” has any relevance, or meaning, or packs any weight whatsoever in science. It has not, It does not and it never will. Science is not about “consensus”. To suggest otherwise could indeed be either delusional or dishonest. If someone is delusional they probably aren’t being dishonest.
I’m certainly not a fan of Margaret Thatcher, but a definition of the word consensus, attributed to her, seems very appropriate to me.
Consensus: “The process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values, and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead. What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner: ‘I stand for consensus?”
I was using the word “consensus” in the sense (“general agreement” that whenever anyone has done a survey of the opinions of randomly-selected scientists, in excess of nine out of ten scientists agree with statements asserting that humans are responsible for the current global warming, and that agreement increases in proportion to how close climate science is to each respondent’s speciality.
I guessed that, because you are a self-professed nutbar or liar. Or as (you phrased it) “climate change denier”.
Before we get all holier than thou…
How are our efforts going in reducing emissions?
“New Zealand pledged in the Paris Agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions by 11 percent compared to 1990 levels by 2030 – but emissions in 2015 were 24.1 percent higher than 1990 levels.”
Still waiting for electric cars to save the day?
National signed up to to the agreement to say that they were doing something because people are concerned about it but they never had any intention of doing anything as their use of fraudulent carbon credits shows.
You do realise it was the last Labour Government that negotiated the rules on international emissions trading, and which opposed any restrictions on the amount and type of emissions units that could be used to offset New Zealand’s emissions obligations?
To quote from the press report at the time:
“New Zealand opposed restrictions on trading. Our minister [sic] responsible for climate change policy, Pete Hodgson, said that such restrictions would be just an economic impost on countries trying to comply. They could require countries to take higher-cost options than would otherwise be necessary.”
If you think the next Labour Government is going to stop using international emissions units, you are dreaming.
Holy false equivalence. Opposing restrictions on trading is some how the same as buying fraudulent units …
No Fair! If S Rylands isn’t allowed to tell lies, how will he earn a living?
You do realise that I’m not a Labour supporter don’t you?
And even if it was Labour that put in place the ETS that was only because National killed the carbon tax that they were going to do.
And that it was National that guess the ETS after Labour put it in place.
And finally it was National that bought fraudulent carbon credits that had already been banned in Europe.
Your cries of ‘Labour did it to’don’t stack up to the damage that National has purposefully done.
You’re a Dracoland supporter bro. I’m not sure how many of us would want to live in your perfect world.
So, did you actually have a point?
I’m particularly looking forward to all those who never really believed in the Paris Accord in the first place reminding us all that it was never going to work anyway.
Because the main point of today is all about process, not content: that global and binding agreements really are possible, will rarely be enough, but are the high limit of what diplomacy can achieve.
So when national signatories rescind their signature in any form, the full media and diplomatic force of the world is arrayed against them.
Hi ad, I suppose it has to be about process as nz has no content to point to, apart from bookkeeping shenanagins i.e. carbon credits.
Insane, but honestly, what has New Zealand done to counter climate change in the past 9 years except pretend and deal in fraudulent carbon credits.
We just led the way for Trump!
The whole carbon credit trade business reminds me of the administrator in this Monty python sketch:
Just brilliant, just fucking brilliant, We are in need of a Monty Python today
“What has New Zealand done to counter climate change in the past 9 years?”
This will help make Climate Change a bigger issue for our election and give Labour/Greens more opportunity to show the shallowness of the National Party Climate Change policy and accompanying environmental issues.
It also gives a reality check on the relationship between NZ and USA and the need to keep our distance and independence.
I think you may be right TMM
It also causes me to think that the Greens may be the major beneficiary electorally because they have the most well defined policy positions on climate change and the environment etc.
The question then is if the Greens benefit the most electorally, who will lose out? Its not clear to me if thats national or labour.
It also causes me to think that climate change could well become the rallying cause for opposing Trump and all that he represents. And again this benefits the Greens most, if it happens
Have you seen those diagrams that show the flow of voters? I think there plenty of votes to go around for both Labour and the Greens and I support them aiming for governing alone.
Climate change won’t be a big issue for this election. The reason being that most people have more immediate concerns to worry about and couldn’t give a jot about it in regards to the election. A huge number of these “most people” are the Left’s traditional voting base, the working class.
The left in the USA recently ignored ordinary hard working blue collar americans and Trump is now president. Ignore the working class, or treat them as idiots, or disrespect them or forget about them at your peril, because the left will never win another election without them.
The one thing I quite like about Andrew Little is that he seem to understand this. Alas he still allows himself to be pushed around by or still panders to various minority groups whose agendas and vales don’t align with those of the working class and he still submits to the scourge of out of control political correctness.
Elon Musk has quit as Trump advisor, citing reality of climate change.
Lets be honest..
Elon Musk, Co-founder and CEO of Tesla, Co-founder and Chairman of SolarCity, Inventor of the proposed Musk Electric Jet, has quit as Trump advisor, citing Trumps position being incompatible with his vested interests in electric cars, solar power, etc,etc,blah blah fucking blah…
Andrew Littles older brother steels Andrews favourite saying, ‘Get some guts and join the right side’.
Anyway Trump has plenty of guts and not only talks the walk but actions what he says.
Toxic to some !
But if you read Gwynne Dyer Independent London journalist ODT page 7 June 2 US has huge problem.
What he said ” – if you include those who are not working and not just the job seekers, then 17.5% of American men of prime working age (24-55) to use the old word US unemployed. The last time US unemployment was at that level was in 1936, in the middle of the Great Depression”.
What I remember about US unemployed stats 4.5% who get a benefit of sorts, but once you have been unemployed for 6 months you come off the tally and become job seekers who get no payments at all.
Lets hope Trump can turn this around, but my bet he won’t.
Imagine if New Zealand did this to our unemployed, I know some do come off and go onto a sickness benefit, at least they still get a payment of sorts.
There is no need to imagine; this is happening in NZ.
And there is no “sickness benefit”.
As bad as China’s human rights record is, perhaps we should look to re-orientate of foreign policy to it. At least they doing something about lowering their carbon-emissions.
Also, does anyone know Tillerson’s schedule next week? I want to give him a piece of my mind (only as my right to protest—yes I know you’re watching this GCSB and FVEY! Seriously, fuck off!).
No doubt the 17.5% of American men of prime working age (24-55) who are unemployed are walking around in the shirts of their favourite football, baseball, basketball and hockey teams. All made in China.
Pete, you have been watching too much American TV.
The Paris climate accord has never been ratified by congress in the US, and “ratification” was an action taken by Obama on his own using his presidential power, so it was always on Trump’s list for destruction. However, much action against climate change in the US is being taken by cities and states, and even individual industries, and this presumably will continue. Even here in little New Zealand, most real action is being undertaken by business through initiatives such as the Sustainable Business Network. If governments won’t act, then it is still open to business and individuals, and presumably local councils, to get on with it.
“..action against climate change…”
So is that against all climate change (meaning we want to stop climate change altogether?) or just against bad climate change? Or is it really perhaps action against carbon emissions? Is it defined somewhere what “action against climate change” actually means? Because if you look at it with a rational and logical mindset, that phrase means nothing whatsoever and anyone who uses it is quite frankly not thinking.
Let me guess, you must be one of our business ‘leaders’? or someone prominent at the forefront of sustainable business….?
Is the Paris Agreement really as good as it’s cranked up to be?
Trump said the Paris agreement disadvantaged the United States.
Well signing up is going to cost us a billion dollars a year (perhaps more) while our emissions are forecast to increase.
Therefore, it seems it’s also going to put us at a disadvantage. What are the benefits of NZ signing up?
Silly.. The idea is to have penalties for letting emission increases happen.
Perhaps you haven’t figured out the point of the agreement. It is to cause a transfer of resourses from those backsliding polluters to the people who are actually cleaning up.
Incidentally the main reason we are paying is because of purchasing junk emission credits under our ETS because they are cheap, allied with with National always loosening emission standards.
In this case, having penalties for letting emission increase will result in a transfer of wealth offshore. And with the amount of wealth already leaving our shores, such an increase is the last thing our economy needs.
Moreover, as costs are generally passed on, it will hit those in the lower economic spectrum the hardest Driving up inflation and inequality. Sending us further in the wrong direction. Which brings our signing up into question. Surely there has to be a better way forward? Is there an escape clause?
Benefit (1) > planet
Got anything more direct?
What I wanna know is: once he’s picked the planet he’s going to make better, how are we all going to get there?
Maybe it’s Planet Key? I’m not sure I’d want to move there – there aren’t any toilets, not even gold ones. Since there are only golf courses, you have another reason to stay out of the sand traps.
look any time now, the Man trump and his mates will save the world. They will stop all the wars in the middle east, clean up corruption and big money and shit.
you mean he is not? well oh dang diddely doo, whowudavethunk?
I don’t think Trump is against the idea of mitigating climate warming caused by human activity. Instead it is the belief of his supporters that the Paris agreement unfairly burdens the USA economically that is the base of Trump’s position.
This isn’t so bad, because it means Trump is looking for a renegotiation of terms and conditions.
Same with the NAFTA agreement, Trump hasn’t ripped it up, he has signaled a need for a new deal where his support base gets a better slice of the pie, between the relevant parties. Interestingly both Canada and Mexico are more than happy to engage.
So you’re saying that you think you can trust a word he says, and he wants to renegotiate voluntary emission targets.
And nothing about this opinion of yours bothers you at all?
That is the curious thing, if the whole Paris agreement thing is voluntary, non binding etc, who cares who bothers to sign up, its a hollow gesture.
Does anything President Trump said today support your assessment?
Yes, Trump said he wants to look at it again and see if an agreement that is in the interests of his support base is feasible.
Your headline should be: “Madman Trump honours election promise”.
The Economist doesn’t mince its words. Remember, it’s always been on the side of business interests too.
“Mr Trump has dealt a severe blow to America’s interests and standing… Mr Trump has signalled that America will neither honour its agreements nor moderate its pollution… unconscionable… fatuous… Mr Trump has made such a mockery of diplomacy and policy-making… More hot air than a flue-gas stack… A truly businesslike president would have explored such solutions. Mr Trump has instead chosen to abuse the health of the planet, the patience of America’s allies and the intelligence of his supporters.”
No, The Economist pedals Globalist ideology. Therefore Trump, a Nationalist, is their sworn enemy, just like he is for the Eurocrats.
This is why elites both on the Right and Left hate him, they are Globalists who lost control of the narrative.
He’s going to drain that swamp any day now, you wait 🙄
So what is it we are suppose to hate about Trump, his stated objectives or his failure to deliver on them?
Have you got room for more hate? It looks pretty crowded in there.
Are beings who negotiate binding international treaties called “Globalists”?
I think we both know what the Globalist world view is. And it is an interesting one though fatally flawed.
“Remember, it’s always been on the side of business interests too.”
I think you are mistaken. The Economist has a long liberal tradition. It has endorsed the Lib Dems in the upcoming election.
It’s underappreciated how much of the technological innovation in current renewable energy systems has come directly out of US government research spending. A lot of it is originally military, through agencies such as DARPA.
While I hope a critical mass of people, ideas, and economic activity has been created in the private sector to keep the innovations coming, the government research money is something Trump has a lot of influence over and I fear Trump will try to put a stop to it.
The only thing more ridiculous than this being a lie is if it’s true.
good on him, anyone with a brain knows that climate change is a con, invented to scare-monger, control (false flag) and create taxes, for air, good on him. Someone who sticks to his promises. And good on the sensible people of the US, for voting him their President. There is hope yet. A man who sees the BS out there, and then cuts through right through it.
“false flag”? 🙄
What’s more likely: hundreds of thousands of climate scientists, physicists, and other scientists get together over decades to invent the biggest conspiracy the world has ever seen, or someone who tweets “covfefe” at midnight while sober has just made a major mistake?
He acknowledged the reality of AGW: his main “mistake” was promising to renegotiate voluntary emission reductions.
Must be a consensus round here somewhere….that’ll learn ’em…
“Teach”, not “learn”.
Just to go with the other big word you picked up today: “consensus”.
anyone with a brain knows that climate change is a con
Meanwhile, on Earth, everyone with a brain has noticed that in pledging to renegotiate the Paris agreement, Trump has acknowledged the reality of anthropogenic climate change.
Conclusion: Tanz has no brain.
Does Trump have one? Just as perplexing..
He clearly has an amygdala.
Yea, everyone on earth with a brain noticed that in pledging to renegotiate the Paris agreement, Trump is playing politics, as politicians do. He would acknowledge anything he wanted to if it meant increasing political capital, as would any politician because that’s what they do. “…acknowledged….reality….blah….blah…..blah….”
All I know is that so called climate change is an invented scam, for various reasons, but mostly to control the sheeple. Even when NZ pays its expensive and job-killing share, China and India never ever will. There are plenty of scientists who don’t think that global warming is real, but mostly their evidence is not allowed, by a compliant and biased MSM. The UN is behind much of the scam, also, and liberal govts just lap it all up. duh.
How refreshing Trump is, and brave!
You “know” that, do you?
We have far too many of these MSM and UN organised conspiracies ruining the world, it goes right ack to the faked moon landings… /sarc
“The UN is behind much of the scam, also, and liberal govts just lap it all up. duh.”
Uninformed twerp ! it’s the Bilderberg Group and the Reverse vampires who are behind it.
In his statement today, Trump never said climate change is a hoax. He accepted it is a reality, and said the US will respond in a way that suits the US.
Nobody thinks climate change is a hoax and everyone accepts it as a reality. I think you,ll find that its the catastrophic and out of control anthropogenic global warming theory that the majority of the worlds population are unconvinced about.
Well, except the people who actually study it.
And people who listen to people who actually study something, rather than listening to nutbars and charlatans.
Whatever. The second you used the word consensus you essentially lost any argument. When consensus and any other non-scientific words rolled out to try and back up or give more credence to any particular claim or claims it always tends to be the case that the claims those words are used to support are themselves unconvincing and / or can’t stand up to scrutiny on their own merits.
If most of the working class either don’t believe in AGW or don’t care about AGW then either some group of people have done a really, really, really shit job of explaining it or the science and / or data associated with it doesn’t reinforce its credibility as a theory. Strong arguments backed up by real data, never need ‘help’ from words like consensus. They also tend to make common sense and explain themselves. They are accepted easily as being representative of factual information because they are.
The left (of which i am part), particularly the special interest agenda driven groups which have infected and taken over the voice of the left , have become so disconnected from and so patronizing toward, the left’s working class base that they display an almost wilful ignorance as to why the left seems to be losing ground. I’ll say it again, the working class aren’t stupid, they aren’t generally all a bunch of racists or bigots or white supremacists or whatever other names they get called simply for having their own opinion.
The working class will look at things like modifying data to fit models and say to themselves why would you falsify the data, unless your argument doesn’t hold water? (remember, explaining is losing) They will find themselves being abused and ridiculed, described as ‘deniers’ (the word being used as an insult) and will say to themselves, who the hell does this snotty nosed academic think he/she is, telling me what i should or shouldn’t think or do?
They will read about record levels of mass immigration to New Zealand and understand why their wages never go up.
They will see themselves being neglected and relegated to the bottom of the priority ladder by politicians who pander to a bunch of vocal minority groups and ‘Social Justice Warriors’. They will think to themselves these entitled wankers are more concerned about moronic ideas such as redefining gender as a social construct (for example) or having gender quotas, than they are about me and my ability to provide for my family.
They will abandon this ‘new’ left in their droves, just like they did in the USA.
The working class IS the left FFS. Forgetting that or relegating it from being the truth to being a barely tolerated, somewhat fanciful idea from the past, is the same thing as to lose this years election, in my opinion.
You were given the proper meaning of the word consensus but you still choose to invent your own meaning for the word. The way it’s being used here means there is agreement between the people who actually study something (in this case climate change) that what they are observing is actually happening. Perhaps you see the con part at the beginning of the word and automatically think of conspiracy but they are completely different words with different meanings.
It’s a wonder you have made it this far in life really because I can’t help but think that if a group of experts warned you against eating poisonous berries you would doubt their toxicology findings (maybe due to an irrational dislike of experts) and consume them anyway.
“…but you still choose to invent your own meaning for the word. ..
Hilarious! Can you tell me what this “own meaning” I invented was? Because I can’t find any evidence anywhere of me posting a meaning which i have invented, for the word consensus. Dishonest, deceptive, or just stupid?
An agreement between people studying something means that people studying something agree with each other. In other words it means fuck all. it certainly doesn’t mean they’re correct about anything and it doesn’t make the the word consensus have any relevance in science.
“maybe due to an irrational dislike of experts”. Wow. You obviously don’t have any idea about how truly moronic that statement is. Liking or disliking someone has nothing to do with the scientific accuracy of their viewpoint. Something I do dislike is forcing myself to reply to posts from moronic, social justice warrior, peudointellectuals such as yourself. Talk about an empty vessel, come back when you’ve got something substantive to add instead of trying to be clever and failing.
Your dictionary was written by Margaret Thatcher, and you claim to be left wing?
If you say so….(yawn)
No you said so REMEMBER
You also said: ” If someone is delusional they probably aren’t being dishonest.”
And that probably sums you up in the most charitable manner.
You are either a fool or an unpleasant troll.
whatever…sarc…sarc. Trump is still the world leader, and good on him, for his bravery and his non-compliance. Yeah!! What a leader! History will love him and are all the voting citizens of the US somehow wrong?
The majority of US voters were correct.
Unfortunately, Trump was declared president even though he received 3million fewer votes than Clinton.
BTW, trump isn’t “brave”. He’s stupid, and a coward. Look how he sucks up to the leaders who beat his handshake (Macron, Trudeau), and pushes others around. He’s a two-bit thug.
And, it seems, pretty stupid. Trump does not seem to understand the Climate Accord he is withdrawing the US from. The US can decide for themselves how to work towards the Climate Accord targets. It doesn’t need a re-negotiated deal.
Russell Brown on Trump’s ignorance:
“So leaving the accord has been almost entirely a matter of ideology”
No shit! Politics is almost entirely about ideology. surely that is not a surprise or anything new and amazing FFS.
Who would have thought, ideology being played out in the whitehouse, a massive building full of politicians and their assorted masters, cronies, protectors, servants, etc,etc.
“Clearly, the fact of US withdrawal is bad”
Why not just say “US withdrawal is bad”? “The fact of” seems redundant. Anyways, bad for who? and how do you know this so soon? Are a couple of questions one might ask Brown. And being a real ‘journalist’ no doubt he’ll have meticulously researched data and / or evidence to back up this bold claim.
A staggering point of view IMHO. Maybe the hole in the ozone layer was a scam as well, that spawned a yet another worthless intergovernmental protocol. /sarc
The self-interested entertainer Trump is simply a very influential chairman of the board:
‘The chair of the board of DuPont was quoted as saying that ozone depletion theory is “a science fiction tale…a load of rubbish…utter nonsense”.’
… are all the voting citizens of the US somehow wrong?
Nope. Many of them are intelligent, sane and none of those ones voted for the madman, Trump. Unfortunately there’s a lot of insane thick-heads living there too. Why not go and join them cos that’s where you belong.
There you go again, reeling off the insults… guess why Trump won?
inciting assaults, mocking the disabled, hacked emails distributed in a biased manner, a partisan announcement from the justice department, and an archaic first past the post electoral college system rather than a process that recognises the will of the majority.
That covers most of it.
Oh, and millions of morons like you.
reeling of the insults rather than engaging in proper, enlightened and intelligent debate; this is the hallmark of the left. Suck it up, Trump won, the majority of the voters voted Trump and no wonder. Ain’t it grand!
Are you going to be voting for people or money this September?
Two platforms only this election, housing and immigration, as these are both having serious consequences for Kiwis and NZ and our way of life as a whole. Money, oh, that folding stuff, it’s temporary you know.
Immigration is a whipping boy. It’s a high profile issue because that one word touches so many of us in such a variety of ways. I think it’s a beat-up. Winston’s Pony.
Houses, yep. A roof over our heads, after a feed and a drink there is nothing higher on the needs scale. 9 years they’ve had, it’s a fair go Tanz. If the left could put a scheme infront of you that you believed would fix this current housing fuck-up, would you vote for them?
It touches so many of us, those looking for a rental or a place to buy. Mums and Dads that are fed up with their kids living in the rumpus room. I reckon the key to an election victory is a sexy solution to the housing thing.
“We’re going to build lots of houses it’s going to be really fantastic, you won’t believe how fantastic.” It won’t work here, we’re too smart.
It’s politico blowhard.
How? Make me believe you can make it happen…Build it, they will come.
The fix is the stopping of mass immigration, especially into heaving Auckland, and the banning of overseas investors. But both of these problems are ignored by the main parties, hand’s off and not PC.
We are doomed. My kids will only get a house if we help them into one, and we ourselves are looking to buy in deserted NZ towns. Born and bred Aucklanders, and now unsurped. Yep sexy answers to housing, are needed, real and lasting answers, but no one seems to have them!
…Labour will ban foreign speculators from buying existing New Zealand homes.
The Labour Party plans to ease immigration levels if it wins the general election in September.
Wrong on both counts then. Are you trying to make my point for me or something?
There was literally one insult in that entire list.
And no, “the majority of the voters” did not vote for Trump. The majority of the Electoral College voted Trump, and they are a tiny subset of the people who voted. More people voted for Clinton.
Hey, that’s the fucked system of “democracy” they have in the US, fair enough. But don’t pretend that making the losing candidate the president is “grand”. It’s archaic and anachronistic.
Shows you have little understanding of the American political system. For a start, the United States is not a democracy, it is a democratic republic. When you understand what that means, you will understand why the popular vote is not what actually elects candidates.
Being a democratic republic, the USA political system is quite upfront and honest about the relevance or not of the popular vote.
Not like us here in New Zealand, where we prattle on about having a more representative system then the USA for example. Our system allows a party with less than 1 percent of the popular vote to have representation in parliament whilst a party that gets 3.5 percent of the popular vote gets no representation. We have a system where the government is sovereign, which enables things such as a shitload of legislation being passed every year despite it being inconsistent with the Bill of Rights act.
maybe the USA type system is something we should aspire to?
All that aside, as soon as you start blaming the system for Clinton’s election loss rather than the candidate and the party, you essentially show everyone that the correct result was the result attained.
Whereas if you want to understand what happened, blame is completely useless. I very much doubt McFlock was employing it.
That was a nice rant.
I actually agreed with the bit where you said the USA isn’t a democracy. It will come as a surprise to many Americans, though.
But either way, more people voted for Clinton, so the “majority of voters” did not vote for Trump.
Trump won the election fair and square and he is brave, he dares to fly in the face of
a very liberal West, where if you don’t join in with the leftist group think you are very quickly cut off at the knees. He is far braver than any other Western leader, he says what he thinks and is a loather of the West’s enemy – PCness and progressive (regressive) thinking. So so refreshing. Just wish we had a Trump, he reminds me of a modern, clear thinking and strong Churchill or Thatcher. Go Trump, give ’em heaps!
Love the way you went from “all the voting citizens of the US” to “Trump won the election” and hoped nobody would notice.
But this was your best bit:
…with tiny, tiny hands.
I really wish Trump were more Churchillian. Churchill was drunk most of the time, whereas Trump does his midnight tweets sober. Covfefe!
It was all about tax.Taking money off those that earned it,and giving it to those that want it.
Taxing cows farts must be the biggest ripoff ever devised by any one.
Thank god for Trump.
Trump, in drivelling that he will renegotiate the voluntary emission reductions, tacitly agreed that AGW is real. You are too much of a fool to have noticed that.
I like pointing that out, so I’m going to keep on doing it.
Whatever.If he was drivelling he agreed to nothing.
A fool and his money are soon parted and Trump is no fool.
A multiple bankrupt, in fact.
++100! You said it so well.
Stated like a true moron.
Get a brain…..
Please move to America…or Somalia.
“Thank god for Trump”
God must really hate us.
Churchill and/or Thatcher would’ve eaten Trump for breakfast apart from the fact that they wouldn’t have been able to countenance being in the same room as such an oaf.
The earth is flat, so don’t sail too far west or you’ll fall into a void. All hail free thinkers!
Brainwashed, now from kindy age, into the ‘green’ religion. The only cause of climate change is the sun. As it’s always been, if it exists, it’s natural. Ever read Air Con by Ian Wishart? He makes the argument well, but of course, I bet no one on left would even consider reading the evidence of both sides. Balance? Flat earth….sigh, nothing to do with it and nothing but a diversion
You don’t understand the evidence, because you are too stupid.
Once you know what to look for, it’s obvious that CO2 etc are greenhouse gases because of their atomic structure. You cannot grasp Quantum Mechanics so your best bet is to think about how electric motors work. I bet you don’t understand that either.
According to “the evidence from the other side”, the sun is cooling down, you fucking idiot.
Ian Wishart has no credibility whatsoever.
There isn’t two sides – merely reality and the reality is that we are changing the climate at an alarming rate.
Ian Wishart appears to be a con.
Ian Wishart lacks the wit to con anyone. He can spout other people’s lies quite effectively though.
Tanz argues like an eager 13-yr-old cheerleader, with lots of barracking but no substantial logic. Can Tanz please try to change style and write like a moderately educated adult who has a grasp of rationality?
Quite so, In Vino.
Must admit my first reaction to reading his entries was “Isn’t there some homework somewhere that needs your attention, lad?”
Tanz is a she and a fan-girl of the ridiculous Colin Craig. So clearly homework is not something she has ever been good at.
He didn’t do it and he’s an amazing poet anyway! lol
Amazing poet indeed. If he doesn’t receive a Nobel Prize for Literature it has to be rigged.
The clue is in the name, Tanz. Now what could that be short for?
John Roles wrote a song featuring this name….
I am a fan of what the Conservatives stand for, which for one, is integrity, common sense and family values
Oh yes, I remember those!
They also stand for bad poetry.
Actually, his poem was pretty good. Doesn’t he have a degree in English lit? Not bad at stringing together a rhyme, are you jealous of his talent and or riches??
I mean, sure it’d cool to be richer, but I’m more comfortable than many, and can’t complain with any real validity. And as for his “talent”, I’m not jealous of the “talent” that produced this:
He’s no John Donne, I’ll put it like that…
Yes, he is something of a Robert Frost, is he not. Ah, what talent!
whatever works for you, I guess.
Nah, you stand for ‘I’m lonely please notice me.’
If you cared about integrity and family values you wouldn’t be backing Col.
But you’re in luck Tania, I noticed you and I reckon you’re a bit of alright.
do ya now? hmmm..how thrilling. Gee, this thread is getting very silly..
you started it
Give me the honesty and passion of a 13 yr old cheerleader’s argument any day over that of some self entitled, thinks they are being intellectual patronizer who tries to belittle someone, suggests that they are uneducated and lack the ability to think rationally, simply because they have a different viewpoint.
In Vino, that’s such a pathetic post that you would have been better to just go for out and out name calling.
Just in case your obviously superior education and intellect prevent you from being able to understand how such a thing works, I’ll give you an easy example..
you’re a tosser!
simply because they have a different viewpoint
Or perhaps because their viewpoint is suggestive of limited intellect, or at the very least, woeful ignorance. Now, “ignorance is a condition we all share”; anyone regarding it as a failing isn’t paying attention.
Stupidity is also something we all do from time to time.
However, In Vino’s criticism of Tanz’s behaviour doesn’t say anything about Tanz other than that she’s employing poor arguments, and that cap fits like a glove.
Please stop. You are making a laughing stock of yourself.
If you want to be taken seriously that is….
Sorry I’m not here often enough to know that Tanz is a she… I should have figured it out, because she spells better than a teenage boy. Is she related to CC?
No need to be sorry, I just tend to remember some of the craziest comments I’ve read on TS.
No idea if she’s related. They seem similar in as much as they both come out with some real doozies though.
Here’s something Tanz once said about another CC
Tanz will now make her case for a flat earth.
Oh stop it
Is Tanz a self parody ?
Tanz loves the bible, C. Craig, J. Collins and smacking kids.
She hates Homosexual Law Reform, Socialisim and David Bain.
She wasn’t too keen on Key but only because she thinks he’s a lefty!
Whatever….you just fill in the blanks for me.
You are right on one count though, I am a fan of the Bible. Proud of that, after all, its what Western civ was built upon. Look at the state of the world now, The BIble has been taken out of schools and chaos has been the result, has it not, and on most fronts. Yet prisoners are allowed to read the Bible. Cliff and ambulance.
Go Trump, so cool, so very happy la la, shall celebrate with a lovely deep red…
So Trump is God, he got stood down from school and that’s why some say he can’t read too well , if at all?? 😉
Of course Trump is a cock, we’re provided with daily confirmation but I’m kind of wishing that he promised to build 100,000 houses in NZ.
Finally a politician that walks the talk, what a shame he talks such utter shite. His follow through in a Bernie would of been magical.
That is a good point. Both Bernie and Trump are populist outsiders. The Democrat branch of the Globalists managed to stab Bernie in the back successfully – though they got caught with their pants down via the email leaks and the DNC president had to quit but got a cushy job with Team Hillary of course.
But the Republican branch of the Globalists failed to take out Trump. Chaos ensued.
It was suppose to be a Globalist Coke or Diet Coke “choice” for the US electorate.
Yes, Bernie and Trump were out to capture the imaginations of voters. All great leaders are good at that, they seduce support out of us.
Trump was great at seducing support from folk that aren’t really my cup of tea, gee he was good at it. So many people buying into that “It’s going to be fantastic, I can’t begin to tell you how fantastic’ BS.
We are steered by our emotions, we like to think we’re rational, we ain’t. The guy that says he bought a Porsche because the driver’s seat is adjustable in 12 directions and the turbochargers have variable vanes is lying. He bought it because it’s a Porsche. Emotional. Same with Trump, his poppycock connected with emotions.
Who backstabbed who, what the papers said etc, I think it takes a back seat to the capture of an audiences’ emotions.
“we like to think we’re rational, we ain’t. The guy that says he bought a Porsche because”
…he wanted to increase his social status and sexual market place value, I reckon. Good old chromosomes doing what billions of years of Evolution has fine tuned them to do, haha.
“folk that aren’t really my cup of tea,”
Not my crowd either, but then politics makes for strange bedfellows.
Bernie would have been interesting – he would have made those Wall Street operators squeal alot.
Perhaps the meteotsunami striking the coast of the Netherlands today is just a sign of things to come …
An anti-war US president would see shares in Lockheed and General Dynamics plummet. The green and ethical shares would blossom. Capital would follow the capital. A better world would start to happen all by itself.
On a Kiwi level I think this scenario sits squarely with the Greens. I feel they’re not anti business as such, they just think we should be getting our Burt Munros to play with turbines in the river instead of cows turning them toxic.
Regardless of how true it is, our world rep is the All-Black haka and grand pristine scenery. What better back-drop for the Silicon Valley of Green Tech? Our distance from the world used to be our handicap, in a connected world, our spot down here, surfing the crest of our tectonic plates, could be our Ace up the Sleeve.
I think this ‘Hey we’re not anti commerce’ aspect of the Greens is why we catch them, when they’re all tipsy, snuggling with Bill’s mob.
The epicenter of Global Green Tech….there are worse reps.
The thing about this that really gets my goat is that last week The Donald was criticising members of NATO for not spending 2% of their GDP on their military like the USA does. This spending can’t be to defend Europe from Russia can it? After all
Putin is The Donald’s mate. Now he is claiming the USA can’t afford to defend the planet, not even just the USA’s share of the possible cost.
When you start to analyse where the money goes The Donald’s logic becomes even more suspect. You must realise that the USA makes almost all the equipment that the US military uses. This means that only the costs of keeping troops in foreign bases is a loss to the total US economy from all that US taxpayers’ money spent on the military. In most countries large ticket military items (planes, ships) have to be imported and military spending is almost all lost from the economy. So to boost the US economy the us government can increase military spending. If the Polish or Danish governments increase military spending it is a drain on their economies and the Polish or Danish taxpayer sustains an economic loss.
Reducing greenhouse emissions by replacing fossil fuels with sustainable technology can be either positive or negative for an economy. It always helps if the technology was invented in the country and is manufactured in the country using it. If you don’t put government money into research you won’t keep at the front of the technology.
Similarly jobs can be reduced or increased depending on the technology. You do have to note that the coal industry in the USA is continually mechanising and that even if coal use increases dramatically in the US the number of jobs produced will be less than those that will result from wind turbine and solar cell installation, even with The Donald’s decision. Of course those sustainable energy jobs would be even greater in number if the federal government spent money on such programmes.
In all The Donald’s decision seems to be one of let’s take the USA into the dark ages and let’s not defend the US coastal areas (such as Florida). Stupid and contrary to his oath to defend the USA.
Trump behaves in the same manner of a 6 year old spoilt brat.
Unfortunately he is now the leader of a very wealthy nation that built its power and wealth on the energy stored in fossil fuels which it once had in abundance.
Trump has no recollection, from one day to the next, of what it is he actually supports. One day he is all for strong action on climate change http://grist.org/politics/donald-trump-climate-action-new-york-times/ (yes you read it correctly!) the next he is against it!
How anyone can hope to deal sensibly with this maniac is beyond understanding.
The sooner he is removed from the office he now holds the better – not only for the US, but also for the rest of humanity.
The story of The Emperor’s New Clothes comes to mind.
Well , we cant deny the polar bears are dropping in population and now breeding with brown bear species – as they did eons ago, that the Arctic shelf is receding, and that great sheets of ice are dislodging themselves from Antarctica, nor that the freak weather patterns are getting worse, – and that people ‘s activity’s are contributing to some of that… but lets not forget the several ice ages this planet has already had, the mass extinctions , and the laying down of vast tracts of vegetation to form the coal seams we mine as coal today during the carboniferous period…
But lets not also forget the groups that are arrayed against Trump because he threatens their agenda – such as the Club of Rome and even the Council of Foreign Relations and their media machine to get us all thinking the same homogeneous way, – such as the massive weight George Soros inputs.
And currently , Trump cant even change the colour of the tie hes wearing without some major political scandal being woven into it. Even the NZ Herald contains daily doses of ‘hate on Trump’ articles to slate the public’s anti Trump addiction.
So here’s an interesting vid on George Soros and his origins to provide a smidgeon of balance to the narrative 🙂
60 Minutes: George Soros Is Proud Of Using Nazis – YouTube
Video for david soros on climate change you tube▶ 6:43
Another interesting perspective from the same ;
Globalists Plot Against Trump And Infowars At Bilderberg – YouTube
Video for Globalists Plot Against Trump And Infowars At Bilderberg▶ 19:04
It was election promise. You sound surprised.
An interesting read in der Spiegel.
Donald Trump’s Triumph of Stupidity
German Chancellor Angela Merkel and other G-7 leaders did all they could to convince Trump to remain part of the Paris Agreement. But he didn’t listen. Instead, he evoked deep-seated nationalism and plunged the West into a conflict deeper than any since World War II…..
……The German chancellor has become Trump’s adversary on the international stage. And Merkel has accepted the challenge when it comes to trade policy and the quarrel over NATO finances. Now, she has done so as well on an issue that is near and dear to her heart: combating climate change.
Merkel’s aim is that of creating an alliance against Trump. If she can’t convince the U.S. president, her approach will be that of trying to isolate him. In Taormina, it was six countries against one. Should Trump not reverse course, she is hoping that the G-20 in Hamburg in July will end 19:1. Whether she will be successful is unclear.
Trump has identified Germany as his primary adversary. Since his inauguration in January, he has criticized no country — with the exception of North Korea and Iran — as vehemently as he has Germany. The country is “bad, very bad,” he said in Brussels last week. Behind closed doors at the NATO summit, Trump went after Germany, saying there were large and prosperous countries that were not living up to their alliance obligations.
And he wants to break Germany’s economic power. The trade deficit with Germany, he recently tweeted, is “very bad for U.S. This will change.”
“Trump has identified Germany as his primary adversary. ”
Makes sense. In general Germany and Merkel are humane, responsible, successful, educated, concerned about their society and are no fools – all things opposite to Trump.
We are all going to drown and be wiped out in massive storms.