# Donald Trump SPEAKS



## noirua (15 April 2009)

"The Time to Buy Out":  http://money.aol.com/videos/video/main/the-time-to-buy-out/3612787561


----------



## adobee (16 April 2009)

I think Harry Trigaboff of Meriton would also be advising now is the time to buy residential property...


----------



## noirua (14 October 2016)

White House Watch: Trump Takes the Lead
http://m.rasmussenreports.com/publi...ections/election_2016/white_house_watch_oct13

Donald Trump speaks of 'coordinated, vicious attack' to keep him out of the White House  video
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americ...ous-attack-to-keep-him-out-of-the-White-House

Stocks and sectors to benefit from a Clinton or Trump US win
http://www.yourmoney.com/investing/stocks-sectors-benefit-clinton-trump-win/


----------



## Wysiwyg (20 September 2017)

Clearly expressed the U.S. attitude toward rogue nations around the world during his speech to the U.N. General Assembly. Good to see someone actually get up there and give notice to the rogue nations.


----------



## Logique (20 September 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> Clearly expressed the U.S. attitude toward rogue nations around the world during his speech to the U.N. General Assembly. Good to see someone actually get up there and give notice to the rogue nations.



I like this tough talking Donald.  For 'Mr Rocket Man' of Nth Korea, a little bit of his own medicine


----------



## McLovin (20 September 2017)

What a pathetic speech. The leader of the most powerful country the world has ever known has nothing  to offer beyond copying the hollow tub-thumping of a global pariah. America's decline is well and truly underway, and every time Trump engages in this stupid, playground hyperbole he reminds America's allies and enemies of this fact. I doubt anyone in NK is losing sleep over Trump.


----------



## Logique (20 September 2017)

PM Malcolm Turnbull and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop both liked this speech by the President.

I'm not hearing any condemnation of '.._stupid playground hyperbole_' when Kim Jong Un says it


----------



## tech/a (20 September 2017)

McLovin said:


> What a pathetic speech. The leader of the most powerful country the world has ever known has nothing  to offer beyond copying the hollow tub-thumping of a global pariah. America's decline is well and truly underway, and every time Trump engages in this stupid, playground hyperbole he reminds America's allies and enemies of this fact. I doubt anyone in NK is losing sleep over Trump.




Ill agree with you if another rocket is launched with no response from the US.

I sense this is coming to a head.

If its not then in the eyes of the world friend and foe it will be pathetic.

The longer this guy tests and accumulates to worse the situation.
Not to mention chemical weapons! He's stupid enough to use anything
he can get.


----------



## McLovin (20 September 2017)

Logique said:


> I'm not hearing any condemnation of '.._stupid playground hyperbole_' when Kim Jong Un says it




Forgive me if I hold the most powerful person on earth to a higher standard than a 32 year old dictator from a nothing country.

Most of the people I know laugh at Kim's rhetoric, no one takes it seriously enough that it qualifies for condemnation. It shows how far the US has slid that their own president is now in the gutter going tit-for-tat with the fat kid.


----------



## Wysiwyg (20 September 2017)

The trouble with being the upholder of all righteousness in the world is the double standards not so easily disguised. I think Rocket Man is helping them realise American influnece is resented in some parts of the world. You know, if you're not supporting America you are against them.


----------



## notting (20 September 2017)

What Trump is doing is countering the advantage China is trying to gain by trying to embroil the US in North Korea.

Trump is simply saying to China, we are not going to fall for that,  we will just destroy the whole country at little expense to us and all that will be left is South  Korea exactly what you don't want.
So F*ck off with your underhanded provocation.


----------



## Wysiwyg (20 September 2017)

notting said:


> What Trump is doing is countering the advantage China is trying to gain by trying to embroil the US in North Korea.



If China set up military bases in Mexico I can imagine what angst there would be. U.S. has military bases in Japan and South Korea which clearly does not impress the Chinese who see themselves an equal world power along with Russia. Japan v U.S. WW2 yet buddy buddy nowadays even after Hiroshima and Nagasaki civilian population nuclear bombs.


----------



## satanoperca (20 September 2017)

McLovin said:


> What a pathetic speech. The leader of the most powerful country the world has ever known has nothing  to offer beyond copying the hollow tub-thumping of a global pariah. America's decline is well and truly underway, and every time Trump engages in this stupid, playground hyperbole he reminds America's allies and enemies of this fact. I doubt anyone in NK is losing sleep over Trump.




So true, better Trump sorts his own mess out in his own country first. 

Now, who has the most nuclear weapons on this planet, who is a greater threat to destroying the world?

Don't trust what you have be told, trust what you believe.

War has never been a answer to solve conflict and never will.

The US is a dying empire, riddle in debt and fake promises.


----------



## tech/a (20 September 2017)

And your model of society is?


----------



## satanoperca (20 September 2017)

tech/a said:


> And your model of society is?




Where hard work is rewarded, 
people who take risks are admired, 
those who use violence are condemned, 
bankers serve the people instead of controlling the populace, 
where there are more pubs for community cohesion than there are real estate agents, 
where ducks get to roam free, 
where conversation and difference in opinion is appreciated, 
where people have some moral ethics,
Politicians represent the people
Leaders actually lead
And good apples and peaches are available to everyone

And you my friend, what is your stance?  Our are you just another without convictions or moral thought? (take that last bit away, I know who you are, and you and I am but the same)


----------



## tech/a (20 September 2017)

And the winner is?

Irrevocably NO


----------



## satanoperca (20 September 2017)

What?

It is not a football match, no winners or losers.

Bit disappointed that is your reply, but then again you are just a duck!


----------



## luutzu (20 September 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> If China set up military bases in Mexico I can imagine what angst there would be. U.S. has military bases in Japan and South Korea which clearly does not impress the Chinese who see themselves an equal world power along with Russia. Japan v U.S. WW2 yet buddy buddy nowadays even after Hiroshima and Nagasaki civilian population nuclear bombs.




Forget about China (or any country) setting up bases in Mexico (or anywhere near the Americas)... if they do, the US will risk nuclear annihilation just to make the point. 

That's not theoretical or rhetorical, they've done it when the Soviets sent a few nukes to Cuba in the 50s. Despite what Kevin Costner's 13 Days depict... JFK push the world to the brink of nuclear war just to watch the Soviets blink. 

And why did the Soviets sent Castro the nukes? Because they got intel saying that JFK has ordered another invasion on Cuba, one that's about to get the greenlight soon. That and the Khrushchev and his comrades thought that since the US has nukes pointing at them from Turkey, on B52s circling the Motherland... so why can't they do tit for tat? 

Well, only the yank can tit... but no one else can tat.  

---------

As for Japan and S.Korea being buddy/buddy with the US... not really. I mean the leadership of those countries must appear to be partners with the US, but that's what you do when you're put in place to run the colony. 

I've read some years back some analyst was saying that there are hardline "patriots" in Japan (and presumably S/Korea) who are pushing for war and instability in the region so that they can have an excuse to build up their country's military (again) and arms industry... hoping that it would weaken the US's grip and some opportunity to regain more, if not total, independence. 


Most statesman (states-person ) would not be capable enough to navigate these delicate manoeuvres. Trump is so unprepared and incapable it's a good thing the US is not run by his imperial presidency. 

But seeing how he has a hard-on for generals and war parades, then picking either general or wall st bankers, billionaires and sycophants to fill his administration... The Decline... then the Fall.


----------



## notting (20 September 2017)

Russia backed down but JFK never invaded Cuba.  Further JFK confronted Russians in the sea with boats not Nukes!


----------



## luutzu (21 September 2017)

notting said:


> Russia backed down but JFK never invaded Cuba.  Further JFK confronted Russians in the sea with boats not Nukes!




The Bay of Pigs was planned by his predecessor/CIA but he greenlight it. Famously blame his naivety to have believed in "experts" when it failed.

There were many other attempts to take out Castro under his admin. His brother was quite involved in a few ideas to take the Cuban out.

Can't remember where I heard it, who from, but definitely heard that the Soviets sent nukes to Cuba because they got intel of plans to imminently invade it. I'm guessing you can't keep to the invasion plan once you almost went nuclear when the plan was exposed. They did keep to the sanctions until just last year though. 


At about 3:35. JFK risked nuclear war just to humiliate the Soviets.

All these time I thought JFK was a peacenik. Heck, he's as Hawkish as other "great" presidents... telling his brother-in-law, Gore Vidal, that what would Lincoln be without the Civil War etc.


----------



## Wysiwyg (21 September 2017)

luutzu said:


> Well, only the yank can tit... but no one else can tat.



It would be great for the world if the other super powers could take the lead with rogue countries instead of the U.S. playing sheriff all the time. The U.N. Council would enable peace for the whole planet because no one will mess with the super powers combined. Leave the politics out and concentrate on weeding out the dictators. The combined muscle would have the war in Syria, Iran's hate of Jews and Rocket Man assigned to history by now. That is the stage human evolution is at. It is the ONLY solution.


----------



## luutzu (21 September 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> It would be great for the world if the other super powers could take the lead with rogue countries instead of the U.S. playing sheriff all the time. The U.N. Council would enable peace for the whole planet because no one will mess with the super powers combined. Leave the politics out and concentrate on weeding out the dictators. The combined muscle would have the war in Syria, Iran's hate of Jews and Rocket Man assigned to history by now. That is the stage human evolution is at. It is the ONLY solution.




I think it's the nuclear-powered states that's the main rogue states of the world, causing trouble and miseries. It's just statecraft, dominance and general insanity... 

For some reason, every political leader want to dominate. Since WW2, and probably long before that, no state believe in another state's rights to have its own sphere of influence. So instead of accepting a world where another pretty powerful state should have its influence and security, each vie to be completely secure... and complete security for one state mean another will not be secure. 

I mean, it's not enough we lock our doors, build a fence and put soldiers on it. We must do all that, have weapons cache all over the country _and _does not permit neighbours or peer competitor any peace of mind. 

Hence, after the collapse of the USSR, NATO and the US move immediately East towards Moscow. Flipping former Soviet satellites to NATO, all until they reach the Balkans, had a proxy war there... and recently the Ukraine, which I think is still going on. Haven't read much about it in the press though. 

In Asia Pacific we have China rising. China has always been ambitious and warmongering. It suffered that century of humiliation which saw its colonies lost, its land divvied up among the barbarians. 

Since WW2, it's been chained in by the US/West in those 2 or 3 series of "island chains". 

Should the US, or any state wanting world domination, permit China its sphere of influence? Probably not. 

China reckon it needs it. And given the route Europeans took to "open" China up to the world in the late 1800s, can't really blame it for wanting its own backyard free of barbarians. It helps too that the South/East China seas have crap load of oil and fisheries. That'll come in real handy if/when war breaks and its sea trade routes are blockaded.

Seeing how all these major powers have nukes, they can't, shouldn't, and don't want to, fight each other directly. Hence the proxies. 

--------------
As to Iran and Israel.

Israel wants to be a regional Hegemon. The only military power in the M.E. capable of defending itself against Israel would be, Iran, Saudi Arabia and possibly Turkey. S.A. has the hardware it's forced to buy from the US but can't much use it anyway - though they're practising it on the Yemeni the past couple years so if ever they to to war with defenceless state, they'll sure be able to kick its azz.

That and both are vassals to Uncle Sam, so they're technically on the same side. 

Turkey may have a change of heart last year, hence the coup attempt by (not) the CIA ... 

So Iran is the only con-conforming state in the region capable of returning fire if Israel ever decided to fight it for "security reasons" - you know, Arab/Persians always hate Jews, unlike White Christians who always love the Jews.

Anyway, Israel want the US to take Iran out for them. They were hoping Bush Jr. would do it right after Iraq... in fact, I heard some lecture where Israeli's planners was egging Jr. to start with Iran after Afghanistan but have to accept that it's a harder sell to the public (for some reason).

Iraq proves a bit of a nightmare so the plans for Iran was put on hold. 

Ever since then, that nutty yahoo have been trying to push for the liberation of Iran by the US. So he got pretty upset when Obama and Kerry follow Big Oil's and Big Business' directives to make peace with Iran. 

Hence, having Trump as president is, they think, a dream coming true. Just tell Trump Iran says his hair is too fluffy and who knows, the dude might just "totally destroy" Iran for crimes against humanity or something.

------

Conclusions... all states are nasty and violent. In liberal democracies, the people do have some influence on foreign policies (if they wanted to)... hence all these "news" and talks of good vs evil, Axis of Evil, going to war for freedom, democracy and liberating brown people we don't particularly like. 

So if we blindly believe all the bs, the war machines will grind on and a whole lot of people will die. I mean, Saddam and lil Kim aren't nice dudes, it's horrible to live under those farkers. But a war mean there's no living at all, just death. 

Iraq is a worst place now then when it was under Saddam; same with Syria, same with any country getting smashed. 

War is not the solution. War is for profits, death, destruction and a statute or an arch of triumph.


----------



## Wysiwyg (21 September 2017)

luutzu said:


> For some reason, every political leader want to dominate. Since WW2, and probably long before that, no state believe in another state's rights to have its own sphere of influence. So instead of accepting a world where another pretty powerful state should have its influence and security, each vie to be completely secure... and complete security for one state mean another will not be secure.



This all stems from the thoughts of one person and can cascade into large scale conflictl real quick. It's all in the mind and some minds are insane (at least irrational) and in control of people and weapons. 


> I mean, it's not enough we lock our doors, build a fence and put soldiers on it. We must do all that, have weapons cache all over the country _and _does not permit neighbours or peer competitor any peace of mind.



The race for the biggest guns and U.S. is winning. Crazy path of 'defence' at all costs with no turning back it seems. At least in a fist fight one would have a chance but the megatons mean instant vapourisation. 


> So if we blindly believe all the bs, the war machines will grind on and a whole lot of people will die. I mean, Saddam and lil Kim aren't nice dudes, it's horrible to live under those farkers. But a war mean there's no living at all, just death.



Democracy is the better solution for a society. I don't know of any states that have elected a leader to enslave them. 


> War is not the solution. War is for profits, death, destruction and a statute or an arch of triumph.



Some citizens have to fight for democracy.


----------



## luutzu (23 September 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> This all stems from the thoughts of one person and can cascade into large scale conflictl real quick. It's all in the mind and some minds are insane (at least irrational) and in control of people and weapons.



The minds of pretty much everyone who has power is insane. Or at least sociopathic. It's almost a literal definition when the person see themselves as giver of laws, and hence, above it.




Wysiwyg said:


> The race for the biggest guns and U.S. is winning. Crazy path of 'defence' at all costs with no turning back it seems. At least in a fist fight one would have a chance but the megatons mean instant vapourisation.




Yea, having nukes sounds like a good idea but it's quite suicidal. I mean, maybe every country should have a few, just so no one would want to free its people and liberate its resources. But to have stockpiles of them, to have silos stashed all over the country... that's just insane. 

Not just to costs of building, maintaining, securing... all of which comes with risks. Nukes are pretty much useless for powerful countries either way.

Say you're the US... when could you ever justify using a nuke? Only in cases of a near peer-competitor invading all your foreign interests and is about to knock on your gates (or could be convincingly portrayed as about to do so). I mean, you can't even nuke Moscow even though Putin and his no-longer communist regime "screws" with your presidential election 

A peer competitor also have nukes so when you drop one you better drop all or else they'll hit back. Either way, it's loss/loss. For the typical terrorists, there's the MOAB and on down.

But I guess how else will the military industrial complex get its R&D funding if we're all that sensible.




Wysiwyg said:


> Democracy is the better solution for a society. I don't know of any states that have elected a leader to enslave them.




As John Lennon's "Working Class Hero" says, we think we're so classless and free... but we're all f*cking peasants as far as he can see. 

We in the Western democracies don't actually elect our leaders. Beside maybe a local councillor, all candidates are vetted and approved by those men in shadows. 

Those who can't say the right words but do the right things won't get pass the gatekeepers. And if they somehow managed to, they won't get the funding or the favourable coverage, or any coverage by that free press (owned by rich people whose wealth depends on other rich people buying advertising).




Wysiwyg said:


> Some citizens have to fight for democracy.




In any wars we care to name, it's always the poor peasants who fought and pay the price. Then the opportunists politicians/statesman takes over once they know which side will win... then they establish "the people's" this, that and other things. All in name, not in reality and practice.

As Howard Zinn said, freedom, democracy, civil rights and all that is good about society were fought for and won by the "little" people. 

Once the dust settles, the bodies cleared and the blood washed away... it's those who "lead" the fight (from behind) that gain the glory, the gold, the mansions and a city or two named after themselves and their lieutenants.


----------



## Wysiwyg (29 March 2018)

Markets front running Trump announcements? Seems to be a severe leak to Wall Street forewarning Trumps next "public" announcement.


----------



## dutchie (29 March 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> Markets front running Trump announcements? Seems to be a severe leak to Wall Street forewarning Trumps next "public" announcement.




Does that surprise you? After all Wall Street (the Banks etc) are running the country.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (29 March 2018)

Wysiwyg said:


> Markets front running Trump announcements? Seems to be a severe leak to Wall Street forewarning Trumps next "public" announcement.




Charts predict fundamentals pretty accurately.  Not sure how it happens.


----------



## noirua (8 April 2018)

Donald Trump on fire: 
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?lang=en


----------



## noirua (10 May 2018)

*Donald Trump says 'everyone' thinks he should get Nobel Peace prize - but he just wants 'victory for the world'*
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...everyone-thinks-should-get-nobel-peace-prize/


----------



## Gringotts Bank (10 May 2018)

noirua said:


> *Donald Trump says 'everyone' thinks he should get Nobel Peace prize - but he just wants 'victory for the world'*
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...everyone-thinks-should-get-nobel-peace-prize/



He might be a narcissist, but he's kicking goals.  Makes Obama look ineffectual by comparison, though Obama's health reforms were a winner (pay that).


----------



## pixel (10 May 2018)

yeah, The DT is a "level-headed Genius." He said so himself,
ROFLMAO


----------



## noirua (10 May 2018)

pixel said:


> yeah, The DT is a "level-headed Genius." He said so himself,
> ROFLMAO




Indeed, he has been sent to save the world.  The saviour has come at long last.


----------



## luutzu (10 May 2018)

Gringotts Bank said:


> He might be a narcissist, but he's kicking goals.  Makes Obama look ineffectual by comparison, though Obama's health reforms were a winner (pay that).




How do you have "victory for the world"? Taking on the Martians or what?

Reading a few US State dept. officials saying they're working with European and Arab allies to pressure Iran into *not* developing nuclear weapons. Today. 

You just pulled out of a treaty that's been 12 years in the making, signed by all major powers in the world and Iran agreeing to not develop nuclear weapon.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (10 May 2018)

How good was this?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-10/hostages-freed-by-north-korea-touch-down-in-us/9746044


----------



## bigdog (12 March 2020)

*ASX 200 plummets 7% after Trump announces US travel ban*

President Trump announced a ban on travel from most of Europe to the United States for 30 days Wednesday, marking one of the federal government’s most sweeping measures yet to contain the rapidly spreading coronavirus.

The ban will begin Friday at midnight and will not include travel from the United Kingdom, Trump said in a national address late Wednesday, in which he also announced a series of economic relief plans, including low-interest loans for affected small businesses, and called on Congress to provide “immediate payroll tax relief.”

He will also instruct the Treasury Department to defer tax payments for impacted individuals and businesses, he said.

In another drastic move, the National Basketball Association suspended its entire season after a player tested positive for coronavirus Wednesday night, another sign of the virus’s wide spread and deep impact across the country.

As the number of known novel cases surpassed 120,000 worldwide, the World Health Organization declared the novel coronavirus a pandaemic. “We are deeply concerned both by the alarming levels of spread and severity," WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said, "and by the alarming levels of inaction.”

Also

The United States has more than 1,000 cases with upwards of 30 deaths.
Tom Hanks said he and his wife, Rita Wilson, have tested positive for coronavirus in Gold Coast Australia.
The Dow reached bear market territory on a nearly 1,500-point skid as panic intensified about the coronavirus, which threatens to debilitate global economies and bring on a recession.
Ohio will limit large gatherings, and Washington state introduced similar measures in the Seattle area. The NCAA announced that its college basketball tournaments will be held without fans in attendance.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel warned Wednesday that up to 70 percent of her country could end up infected.
300


----------



## noirua (4 November 2020)




----------



## noirua (5 November 2020)

Trump campaign confident in a pathway to victory
					

Donald Trump and Joe Biden each need 270 electoral votes to win the presidency. Follow here for the latest updates on voting and election results.




					edition.cnn.com
				




CNN forecast Biden 271  Trump 267.


----------



## rederob (4 January 2021)

Defining "delusional" in an American context.


----------

