Why Boycott Atlanta but not Beijing Olympics?

[dukkha]

Nope. Realpolitik accepts the presence of systems of government alien to our own, which is the subject of your thread argument. There are many undemocratic national governments. We don’t spurn them for that.

start with Merriam-Webster definition:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/realpolitik
: politics based on practical and material factors rather than on theoretical or ethical objectives

so
it's about the relationship being practical - not about "ethics" (human rights).

meaning
Your definition is OK as far as it goes -we deal with other nations regardless of their government -true
but the nature of that interaction is based on practicality. The practical and material interactions are what matters.

 

[dukkha]

sensible trade would mean not losing vital strategic capacities, and also not putting so many people out of work with this bullshit.

and no, eliminating rights and enslaving people is not a legitimate comparative advantage.

i.e. "America First"

 

[Althea]

Nope. Realpolitik accepts the presence of systems of government alien to our own, which is the subject of your thread argument. There are many undemocratic national governments. We don’t spurn them for that.

I believe we've learned a lot since our failed 'Arab Spring' meddling.

Certain societies need a despot to keep them in line. Democracy doesn't even work here. It certainly won't work in regions with multiple warring zealot factions inhabiting the same spot in the sand.

 

[dukkha]

I believe we've learned a lot since our failed 'Arab Spring' meddling.

Certain societies need a despot to keep them in line. Democracy doesn't even work here. It certainly won't work in regions with multiple warring zealot factions inhabiting the same spot in the sand.

Iraq wasnt because of the Arab Spring
Libya wasnt because of the Arab Spring -it was a civil war
just WTF are you yammering on? Syria?
OK but Obama just dicked around there -no real interventionism

 

[gemini104104]

ther GA law actually expands voting times (another Biden lie it doesn't)

China violates human rights not just the Uyghers - but shut down the democracy movement in Hong Kong
(violating the treaty not to that returned HK to China)

Because dumb ass Woke dont really GAF about human rights unless it's politically advantaged for Dems

Its because Beijing is not a internal repuke enemy at war against U.S. Constitutional law, the 14th Amendment of U.S. Constitutional law and all core values of America as repukes are more of a enemy than perhaps any other enemy on Earth. This is because the creatures have slithered into governance with the help of idiots who vote against their own interests with the ploy to destroy Democracy from within at doing the bidding of foreign enemies.

 

[martin]

start with Merriam-Webster definition:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/realpolitik
: politics based on practical and material factors rather than on theoretical or ethical objectives

so
it's about the relationship being practical - not about "ethics" (human rights).

meaning
Your definition is OK as far as it goes -we deal with other nations regardless of their government -true
but the nature of that interaction is based on practicality. The practical and material interactions are what matters.

Thank you for that meaningless generality.

The "practicality" in this case is spurning China because its citizens don't have the same voting opportunities as Americans, a silly objection in realpolitik terms.

 

[no worries]

i.e. "America First"

Huh?

President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast. Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 13, 2018

Too many jobs in China LOST?

 

[dukkha]

Huh?

President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast. Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 13, 2018

Too many jobs in China LOST?

still peddling that ignorance that gains by China must be a loss to the USA -huh?
You got a zero sum mind -not good

 

[dukkha]

Thank you for that meaningless generality.

The "practicality" in this case is spurning China because its citizens don't have the same voting opportunities as Americans, a silly objection in realpolitik terms.

no that is NOT PRACTICAL you moron.. that is ETHICAL.. JFC I even gave you the definition.

the practical relationship bypasses ethics (see definition) - and looks where we interact, like on trade.
Which is what Trump - and NOT BIDEN- was all about

 

[no worries]

still peddling that ignorance that gains by China must be a loss to the USA -huh?
You got a zero sum mind -not good

Really?

That's what teabaggers (www.teaparty.org) keep claiming, as did their dear leader.

April 6 2020

“For many, many years China ate our lunch,” President Trump said on Monday, going on to blame predecessors in the White House for allowing China “to get away with absolute murder” on trade.
www.cnsnews.com › article › international

Then Dotard signs a bi-lateral trade agreement with China, INCREASING our trade with them by $200 billion?

 

[dukkha]

Really?

That's what teabaggers (www.teaparty.org) keep claiming, as did their dear leader.

April 6 2020

“For many, many years China ate our lunch,” President Trump said on Monday, going on to blame predecessors in the White House for allowing China “to get away with absolute murder” on trade.
www.cnsnews.com › article › international

Then Dotard signs a bi-lateral trade agreement with China, INCREASING our trade with them by $200 billion?

JFC.. hang you head in shame at your willful ignorance..
do you get the fact trade is generally advantageous for both parties?
so stipulated.

So why is reducing trade with China a goal? it's obviously not - trade is good.

What is bad (malign) is unfair trade. manipulated trade -like where China uses trade to force IP disclosures
Or where China restrict it's markets to US imports -creating a competitive disadvantage to the USA

This is what Robert Lighthizer took 3 years to negotiate with China - so called phase 1 before the CCP unleashed COVID on the world and blew up the deal

 

[no worries]

JFC.. hang you head in shame at your willful ignorance..
do you get the fact trade is generally advantageous for both parties?
so stipulated.

So why is reducing trade with China a goal? it's obviously not - trade is good.

What is bad (malign) is unfair trade. manipulated trade -like where China uses trade to force IP disclosures
Or where China restrict it's markets to US imports -creating a competitive disadvantage to the USA

This is what Robert Lighthizer took 3 years to negotiate with China - so called phase 1 before the CCP unleashed COVID on the world and blew up the deal

Willful ignorance?

"So why is reducing trade with China a goal? it's obviously not - trade is good".

If they are "eating our lunch", which, I agree with BTW, it should be a goal.

If your getting your groceries from a store that has inferior products, that cost you $50 more a week, than a store that just opened up ...................the TPP, Trump cancelled, why would still shop there?

THAT'S, willful ignorance.

 

[Althea]

Its because Beijing is not a internal repuke enemy at war against U.S. Constitutional law, the 14th Amendment of U.S. Constitutional law and all core values of America as repukes are more of a enemy than perhaps any other enemy on Earth. This is because the creatures have slithered into governance with the help of idiots who vote against their own interests with the ploy to destroy Democracy from within at doing the bidding of foreign enemies.

Whereas your post is true, his claim about expanded voting hours is a lie.

 

[anatta]

Willful ignorance?

"So why is reducing trade with China a goal? it's obviously not - trade is good".

If they are "eating our lunch", which, I agree with BTW, it should be a goal.

If your getting your groceries from a store that has inferior products, that cost you $50 more a week, than a store that just opened up ...................the TPP, Trump cancelled, why would still shop there?

THAT'S, willful ignorance.

if you agree trade is good -then why is the goal to reduce trade with China?
you are starting at a logical fallacy

The TPP has myriad problems... get a clue. Bernie and Hillary and Trump ALL were against it

Instead Trump negotiated bi-lateral agreements with South Korea, Japan, and Vietnam

 

[Althea]

Willful ignorance?

"So why is reducing trade with China a goal? it's obviously not - trade is good".

If they are "eating our lunch", which, I agree with BTW, it should be a goal.

If your getting your groceries from a store that has inferior products, that cost you $50 more a week, than a store that just opened up ...................the TPP, Trump cancelled, why would still shop there?

THAT'S, willful ignorance.

He's an infomercial phone worker. He peddles cheap Chinese crap for a living. Don't be surprised by his conflicted random thoughts.

 

[anatta]

He's an infomercial phone worker. He peddles cheap Chinese crap for a living. Don't be surprised by his conflicted random thoughts.

you got nothing as usual.. you come on here and gossip and add nothing. fucking asshole

 

[Monad Portal]

i.e. "America First"

yes! totally!

 

[Monad Portal]

i use the term "counterproductive" instead of pointless, but yes.

still they exist as a factor or they dont -cant pick and choose for convenience

the biggest problem on earth today is americans trying to increase election security. everyone knows that.

 

[no worries]

if you agree trade is good -then why is the goal to reduce trade with China?
you are starting at a logical fallacy

The TPP has myriad problems... get a clue. Bernie and Hillary and Trump ALL were against it

Instead Trump negotiated bi-lateral agreements with South Korea, Japan, and Vietnam

Because Chins is "eating our lunch", why you you trade with a country not being fair?

Hillary was for TPP and always has been, Bernie is against it only because he thinks it will create a loss of US jobs, which, may true initially, just like NAFTA did.

Trump? Wouldn't trust him in a trade for a snickers bar.

Myriad of problems? Like what?

11 other countries had no issues with it, Dotard did.

"Instead Trump negotiated bi-lateral agreements with South Korea, Japan, and Vietnam"?

The US has ALWAYS had trade with Japan (1980's), Vietnam (2000) and S, Korea (2007), Dotard didn't like someone else's name on them so he "negotiated" new ones.

What about the 8 other countries?

That could have replaced a good portion and reduced our trade deficit with China.

 

[Lightbringer]

Because Chins is "eating our lunch", why you you trade with a country not being fair?

Hillary was for TPP and always has been, Bernie is against it only because he thinks it will create a loss of US jobs, which, may true initially, just like NAFTA did.

Trump? Wouldn't trust him in a trade for a snickers bar.

Myriad of problems? Like what?

11 other countries had no issues with it, Dotard did.

"Instead Trump negotiated bi-lateral agreements with South Korea, Japan, and Vietnam"?

The US has ALWAYS had trade with Japan (1980's), Vietnam (2000) and S, Korea (2007), Dotard didn't like someone else's name on them so he "negotiated" new ones.

What about the 8 other countries?

That could have replaced a good portion and reduced our trade deficit with China.

Do you know what the word "always" means?