Professor Noam Chomsky on the Presidency of Donald Trump

I hope this hasn't already been posted.

I came across this video today and thought it was worth a share. Noam Chomsky gives his take on President-Elect Donald Trump, and touches on future US - Russian relations, NATO's presence on the Russian border, the ongoing crisis in the Ukraine, and the looming threat of global nuclear war.

I couldn't agree more. With the current tensions in the air between the United States and Russia (also China), I don't have much hope that things will end well for us. China and Russia are tight, and the US is being slowly ushered to the door. If we expect to hold on to our status as a super power and avoid a nuclear holocaust, then we must focus on diplomacy and better relations. Not strife. This isn't about ego, politics, or petty nonsense. This is about the survival of the human race. Not only with the threat of nuclear war, but with global warming as well.

a reply to: jaymp
Noam Chomsky on AJ TV....It dont get no better than that

Wow. Talk about loaded questions. I made it through about five minutes and it's already about the worst interview I've ever seen.

And shame on Chomsky. He knows full well he's participating in straight up propaganda. He's written critical, long-winded and incredibly boring books on the very thing he's now engaged in.

Apparently propaganda is only dangerous when the other guy is doing it. What a chumpsky.

a reply to: jaymp

If we expect to hold on to our status as a super power and avoid a nuclear holocaust

You can avoid nuclear war and not be a super power. Look at the history of the US invading the middle east for regime change and theft of resources. I don't see Russia barking in America's back yard.
Why do you think peace and not being a superpower are mutually exclusive?

a reply to: jaymp

Noam Chomsky i've seen his stuff.

You should post Brother Nathaniel who is Jewish, he's far out there, really wild. Let me find one. If you don't like it, just toss a few tomatoes at me so i know it sucks.

Bless him, this guy kicks ass

a reply to: jaymp

Noam Chomsky and Sam Harris agree on something! hehehe

What I don't seem to understand is why everyone is hell bent on having another World War? What is the point of it all when you destroy the ONLY planet we live on currently.

We can't just say, "Well we regret nuking this planet now since we had our differences and could've avoided it. I think next time we disagree on something we will be more diplomatic. Alright, the only thing left to do now is mop up and move the remaining survivors to planet B."

There is ONLY "1" planet that is capable of supporting life and the rest of the world is hell bent on destroying it for personal gain...

I pray there is a more intelligent species watching us because I think it's time they scrap this little experiment and start over with the human race.

We have learned nothing.

Trump is unpredictable , and that is part of his appeal . His economic policies are predictably Keynsian however , in fact directly reading from the song sheet of the old left , much as Cameron and Osbornes policies have been , even though they are conservatives . This is because they are prepared to use what works , when it suits them . That is the way to do things too , or at least to get 'things' done to sort the country, economically and otherwise . It counts towards one Trump

Why have the word 'liberals' , 'globalists' and now 'progressives' got so many connotations now , because without definitions we get to wind our own spiel around them and sound educated . Why was 'globalists' left out this conversation then , when no one is worrying war topics since the election as there is no apparent need . Does Chomsky think there is ? Why ? It appeals to a base mentality , fear of new developments in hand with the unpredictable new man in charge - oh no!

Chomsky rightly mentions the mess that would occur if a set to began , and on the face of it you dont need to be a pro political analyst to know that actually , no one wants a war like that , and that nobody can afford it in the first place either.
But he stirreth the pot . Is it actually about the global new world order with no armies OR money left and no more control at the whitehouse, while the media they bought are feeling uncomfortable now ? Could be .. One thing to learn , perhaps , always trust a nationalist over a globalist (sovereignty) . Always trust a Brexiteer over a remainer , and as for Clintons , always trust your own military men when they say 'what the hell?', , if you ask for a no fly zone against russia over syria and never mind the UN ... and don't be surprised if their deposition was coming anyway in that case .
These last factors should wash out in time , its not like the current msms will report it for now , they'll Chomskyize the liberal leaners for now , the yet to fully catch up to speed . They're worried and their protection is evaporating fast . Progress overtakes the sleeping .

a reply to: 4N0M4LY

What I don't seem to understand is why everyone is hell bent on having another World War?

According to the Iron Mountain report, "they" can never let war become obsolete.

Kennedy commisioned this think tank to figure out what exactly would happen if the hippies succeeded and world peace broke out. The conclusion reached was world peace can never be acheived without something to replace the functions of war. Basically if world peace broke out, then nobody would need the government.

Kennedy rejected their findings however and gave a commencement address to the graduating class of American University called "A Strategy for Peace." This is remembered as one of Kennedys finest speeches by many people. Five months later he was gunned down just like anyone else who talks about peace seems to get killed.

originally posted by: 4N0M4LY
What I don't seem to understand is why everyone is hell bent on having another World War? What is the point of it all when you destroy the ONLY planet we live on currently.

We can't just say, "Well we regret nuking this planet now since we had our differences and could've avoided it. I think next time we disagree on something we will be more diplomatic. Alright, the only thing left to do now is mop up and move the remaining survivors to planet B."

There is ONLY "1" planet that is capable of supporting life and the rest of the world is hell bent on destroying it for personal gain...

I pray there is a more intelligent species watching us because I think it's time they scrap this little experiment and start over with the human race.

We have learned nothing.

What are these wars really about? I'd say that they ultimately boil down to acquiring land and valuable resources, the very things that large scale wars destroy.

On top of everything you pointed out, this is the only planet we know of currently that actually has life, tons of it in fact. Our thin fragile biosphere is our most valuable asset. How can any currency equal the total value of the planet wide life support system?

Our physical environment, that contains all resources available to us, should be held to the strictest of laws that are fully enforced. Somehow the human race will need to change and share the earth's resources in a responsible and sustainable way.

A prior poster mentioned the costs involved in war...... like money has a thing to do with it.
How can money be a factor when it is printed up as needed?

If we put a university on the moon and filled it with the best students from around the world, from every country.....the world economy would switch quickly from cars and war being the foundation.... to all of us working together to make sure our kids are safe and taken care of.
And at the end of each students semester ...... we would release on the world a group of young people who know and understand this one universal truth " we live on a little blue dot"...... and they would do what young people do best.......Spread the word

a reply to: jaymp
Noam is entitled to his opinions but he is not omniscient. It was Hillary that said she would intervene in Syria. Trump is always ready to deal and suggested better relations with Russia, which is smart considering which countries have the majority of nuclear weapons in the world. Putin wants to deal and slice the pie. Can he con a con artist?

originally posted by: jaymp

I hope this hasn't already been posted.

I came across this video today and thought it was worth a share. Noam Chomsky gives his take on President-Elect Donald Trump, and touches on future US - Russian relations, NATO's presence on the Russian border, the ongoing crisis in the Ukraine, and the looming threat of global nuclear war.

I couldn't agree more. With the current tensions in the air between the United States and Russia (also China), I don't have much hope that things will end well for us. China and Russia are tight, and the US is being slowly ushered to the door. If we expect to hold on to our status as a super power and avoid a nuclear holocaust, then we must focus on diplomacy and better relations. Not strife. This isn't about ego, politics, or petty nonsense. This is about the survival of the human race. Not only with the threat of nuclear war, but with global warming as well.

His entire premise is based on the current tensions and relationship with Russia which was created under the last 8 years with Obama and the first 4 with Hillary Clinton as Sec. of State and who continue in the same direction. We are closer to a nuclear war under Obama. Yet, no criticism of any of those two or warning about a Clinton presidency.

Trump has expressed that he'd improve relations with Russia and they seem open to doing this moreso with Trump than Clinton. But he's criticized bc his critics seem to be in Cold War mode and say he's a Russian agent.

The biggest thing on Trump is that he's seen as unpredictable and not ideological. I'd argue that it's a benefit bc he's more pragmatic and not ideologically driven. These people seem all too eager to prove that Trump will be the next Hitler and cause a nuclear war. It's nothing but hysteria to me.

originally posted by: Zimnydran
A prior poster mentioned the costs involved in war...... like money has a thing to do with it.
How can money be a factor when it is printed up as needed?

Ask Dick Cheney's mates at Haliburton if they charged the USGovt. during Iraq .. it is taxed from you as needed . They can QE a financial crisis (to keep things flowing) , but not , a war . The banks were recipients of bailouts, they will not be lending it back again. Yrs sincerely , Prior Poster