It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

After Trump’s phone call, Australians worry about an old alliance

page: 3
27
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: SaturnFX

So...Trump is able to not uphold an agreement Obama made, and does so in a phone call.

But Obama couldn't have agreed to it in a phone call?

Seems legit.

Being a government employee I'm well familiar that it floats along on a sea of paperwork. I'm also very familiar with a lot of things get agreed to and then the paperwork is done and signed later on, and at that point it becomes official. My mayor can say anything she damn well pleases, but until the paperwork is done it's just talk. She can agree to anything she wants. She can decline anything she wants. But until paperwork is done and dusted, it's talk.

I'm also not so naive as to believe that because one administration agrees to do something that the next administration is obligated to stay there. As I said, if that were the case we'd still be paying the Barbary Pirates a tribute, we'd still be in Vietnam, and literally countless other things that one administration started and another administration ended.

You keep going on about "rework the deal" and that's exactly what Trump has done: reworked the deal. He's taking another look at it and will likely rework it to something he believes is more advantageous to America.

Being a lefty, I know you need to feel morally superior to Trump on this but this is some incredible mental gymnastics you're playing to do so.

Oh and ps that beer summit? Obama invited Gates and Crowley to the White House by calling them on the phone.
edit on 3-2-2017 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

My source for that claim was the nightly TV news In my part of Oz, if it's inaccurate, I'm not surprised,

it kinda proves what I was saying though. The MSM can be inaccurate, selective and sensationalist, whichever gets them the most ratings.

Americans, and you're el Presidente, are seemingly upset by an intake of immigrants, but it's just an exchange of the same number you were going to take anyway. Not a one way deal like I said.

Ironically in Australia we have much tougher approaches to illegal immigration than the US does.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam

originally posted by: Profusion
I know it's all MAGA to Trump supporters, please move along.


And it's all Armageddon with his opponents.

Please explain to me why this deal is in the US interest?

Essentially, Obama and Australia wanted to swap respective refugees half way around the globe. Theirs come from Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sri Lanka, and other places. Our come mostly from countries in Latin America.

What is the benefit to us again?

It was a stupid deal made by a stupid ex president.

But the deal was made.

The USA should honor its word.......and stick those refugess in Obama's and Clinton property using goverment powers of eminent domain



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: SaturnFX

Oh so men like you still exist? Many thanks to Zeus, thought I was the only one left.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: FelisOrion

Nah you guys have a club, didn't you get the memo? It's the club where you sit around telling each other how great and morally superior your are because you do what somebody else committed themselves to doing.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: FelisOrion

Nah you guys have a club, didn't you get the memo? It's the club where you sit around telling each other how great and morally superior your are because you do what somebody else committed themselves to doing.

You know whats funny, you keep saying stuff like that. I dont think I am morally superior, just a person with principles.
Seems that view is stuck in your head.
Thanks for the complement.glad you appreciate a principled stance.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I'm not even sure this story is real to the degree folks are saying. But... Assuming that this story is exactly as being represented in the two threads. I have yet to see anyone speak to the real issue, no one. In fact the zealots on both sides are scum, morons, people without a moral compass at all shouting their ignorance for all to see without shame or embarrassment.

The moral issue. THESE ARE PEOPLE, the are not f@*&^ing CAR PARTS! So Australia, a large corporation, wants to SHIP HUMANS THEY DO NOT WANT, but OWN, to another country half way around the world. Those HUMANS have no say whatsoever, in fact, if said Australian Corporate Overlords want to send these folks to Barrow Alaska with only boxer shorts and a sack of stale cookies, so what...

My god, seriously, the argument here is Trump this or Trump that, when the real argument is why do people still accept the notion that they are OWNED by the state they are in and are subject to being shipped off like rusty car parts to whoever can get to "take them." Why doesn't the aussie government just kill them? They don't want them, don't need them, don't care about them, are not interested in their "rights" so why not kill them? And don't say because it looks bad to murder the unwanted, because this looks just as bad if not worse, because it gives the fig leaf illusion they care.

If you are not looking at this entire episode, truthful or not, from this POV FIRST, then you are just as bad as the people still passing humans around like slaves.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: bender151
a reply to: Profusion

We would have taken a terrible deal for pretty much no reason, poor Aussie PM gets butthurt, and the whole thing gets called off. So what? Seriously, they put in 2,000 troops to our 165,000 in Iraq. That's not even enough to clean the toilets. Let them deal with their stupid problem.



Can i just point out that we have about 50k active fighting men and women in our ADF.
2k is just under 5% of our total fighting force.
We also only have a total pop of 26m.

America has a total pop of around 350m.
That's roughly 1,364% larger than us.

Your standing fighting force number is roughly 1.3m.
150k of that is roughly 11%.

Not exactly disproportionate numbers there buddy.


In terms of the topic at hand... As an Australian, I think we can do with a little less "love" from America.
edit on 3/2/2017 by Sovaka because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: FelisOrion

Nah you guys have a club, didn't you get the memo? It's the club where you sit around telling each other how great and morally superior your are because you do what somebody else committed themselves to doing.

You know whats funny, you keep saying stuff like that. I dont think I am morally superior, just a person with principles.
Seems that view is stuck in your head.
Thanks for the complement.glad you appreciate a principled stance.


You know what's funny? Your very first comment about it was talking about how anybody who doesn't do what somebody else said they were going to do has no honor.

You made it about honor and principles, nobody else did that. You implied that being unwilling to do what somebody else said they were going to do was dishonorable, and that you wouldn't do that and that anybody who would lacked honor and principles.

You're welcome for the opportunity to pat yourself on the back and virtue signal. God knows you clearly need it, and instead of discussing any actual points you'd rather keep it in the realm of how great you are.

I suspect you'll want to "come back" with some further self-congratulatory comment and that's fine, but I'm done with it. You're going after the emotional debate which, I know, is the more favored avenue of the left as opposed to a logical one but I'm over it. You may declare yourself the winner now.
edit on 3-2-2017 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

You know what's funny? Your very first comment about it was talking about how anybody who doesn't do what somebody else said they were going to do has no honor.

And its true.
Dad taught me at a young age that all you have in life is your word. If you give it, then you should do whatever it takes to honor it. If you break your word, you have nothing. Why would anyone trust you.
Same for a nation. Once you make a deal, it should be fulfilled. Obama didn't give the word as Obama, he gave it as president. Now, does that mean Trump shouldn't renegotiate? no..hell no. deals are constantly being renegotiated, just not broken.

Thats how reality works. If you disagree, well, thats on you...just remind me not to give you a loan


you'd rather keep it in the realm of how great you are.

Well, I am pretty great, its a big realm, but thats beside the point.



but I'm done with it. You're going after the emotional debate

Yes, emotions...seems you are the one worked up. Guess you enjoy cheering for the US to be dishonorable oathbreakers..because you know..Trump MAGA and all that nonsense.

Thing is, even your god emperor Trump isn't on the same page as you here. He said its a dumb deal, and it is..but he didn't say he isn't going to *honor* it, he should negotiate for a better trade mind you, but for now, he remains solid here. Give him a few days though.

So...if I am patting myself on the back for seemingly moral superiority, what are you striving for? flicking yourself off in the mirror or something for having no principles? Seems you wilt away from anything you feel is acting "in the right".



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 08:10 PM
link   
I think that trading human lives under any guise is disgustingly immoral.
Trump made the right decision here. Turnball is a dickhead.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 02:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Profusion


It Australia, regards itself as America’s most reliable ally — the only country to fight beside the US in every major conflict of the 20th and 21st centuries.

What are Australians to make of the fact that Mr Trump had a warm hour-long call with Russian president Vladimir Putin —


Australia, regards itself as America’s most reliable ally. Dunno abut that, the Australian Govt does. that does not mean the Aus people do.

Australia, regards itself as America’s most reliable ally, the only country to fight beside the US in every major conflict of the 20th and 21st centuries.

Does the Aus govt regard itself as the US most reliable ally/slave or do the Aus people, two different things.

Australia, regards itself as America’s most reliable ally, the only country to fight beside the US in every major conflict of the 20th and 21st centuries. - ally or slave?

The only difference is the words used in some deal signed by the Aus and US govt christ knows how long ago ago, that the Australian people never knew about but binds us to them whether we want to not?

A deal the Aus people never ever saw the contents of and never voted on in a referendum.

An aus soldier in vietnam attended a parade addressed by a US senior officer who among other things said: "the brits have got the Gurkers and we've got the aussies. - ally or slave you be the judge.


BTW, i'm totally relaxed about Trump talking to Putin because war is more likely to be avoided if the leaders talk to each other. If Trump wants to make America great again avoiding war is an imperative but of course it depends on your definition of 'great'



edit on 4-2-2017 by Azureblue because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Not a Trump supporter and maybe Australians should keep their nose out of American politics and not throw a temper tantrum if we elect someone they don't want. I don't stick my nose in your politics and threaten to distance myself unless you elect who I say. Return the favor. Half the world are acting like babies who were told they can't have cake before dinner.



posted on Mar, 4 2017 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: uncommitted

So what? Was that inscription sanctioned by an act of Congress? Are we as a nation now forever bound by it? Do the words even relate to the specific realities discussed in this thread?

The 911 memorial has an inscription too. You should read about it.



The response I gave to a previous poster was quite clear - couldn't really have been clearer. The US didn't start off with an attitude of only skimming the cream, rather one of.....


Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest lost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.


Pretty powerful words aren't they? You should think twice before flushing away what made America what it is.


The Statue had nothing to do with immigration. It was about freedom. The French honored us with the Statue to celebrate the friendship between our countries. We were the first nation ever to make the rulers of their country aware that freedom and liberty was possible. The sonnet, "The New Colossus", engraved at the base, was written by the Jewish poet Emma Lazarus as part of a fund raising campaign. She wrote as a way of honoring those Jews suffering from anti-semitism who wanted to flee from their host countries. The original manuscript is held by the American Jewish Historical Society. The sonnet played no significant part in the celebration of the opening of the statue in 1883 and was all but forgotten. 20 years later the text of the poem was put on the inner wall of the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. And that's how the poem ended up on a Statue that was specifically created to honor freedom and originally inscribed only with the adoption date of the Declaration of Independence (JULY IV MDCCLXXVI). And that's why we call it the Statue of Liberty and not the Statue of Immigration.

Today the true story of the Statue of Liberty is disingenuously used for political purposes to paint a gauzy picture of those happy times when we weren't so picky about who was allowed to immigrate to our country. In fact it was just the opposite, the US had (like the rest of the world had, and still has) a merit based immigration policy. Potential immigrants had to stop on the island and pass a rigorous inspection before being allowed to set foot on the mainland. If you didn't have enough money with you, if you had no job skills, or if you had a criminal record, you were rejected. If you passed that phase you were sent to the medical inspection line and uniformed military surgeons quickly culled out those with minor medical conditions. Even a case of glaucoma could cause you to be rejected. The doctors would observe the immigrants as they climbed the stairs leaving the baggage area. If you had difficulty with those stairs, that could cause you to be rejected. Ellis Island was sometimes known as "The Island of Tears" or "Heartbreak Island" because of the immigrants that were turned away.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join