Trump cuts relations with British Ambassador

'Objectively'? No chance, you folks have been whining about Trump and calling him names since he entered politics, nothing you folks can say can ever be considered objective when it comes to Trump. What I find most interesting is this broke around Independence day and American liberals sided with the Limey mutt, now I better understand why the Declaration was written in the first place...

 

Nope, it was the fall of the Soviet Union that did that. Communism sucks, as does socialism and every other leftist ideology based on theft. In the bi-polar world, politics was more influential than the markets were...

 

Except his opinion of Trump was no more objective than your opinion of Trump. Therein lies the problem.

Case closed

 

Of course it was, that was his job. Deal with it.

 

To bad the WRONG GUY was forced to quit!!!

 

Such as when DT in a private meeting referred to shithole countries as shithole countries, oh the feigned outrage.

 

Umm.... it has already been dealt with. The Ambassador is no longer the Ambassador ---- did you miss that detail?

 

Wait.....carrying out genocide isn't insane? What, that's just a political decision?
By the way, that's the best defense of Hitler I've heard since Spock on Star Trek. It's correct, by the way, up to a point.

 

No, genocide, especially as it's used today to mean mass murder of a particular tribal group, is not "insane".
The Hutus weren't "insane" when they tried to exterminate the Tutsis.
Nor were any of the other tribes which have carried out mass murder of their tribal rivals in the past. God even commands this action in the Old Testament.

I will grant that we don't have very precise meanings when we talk about human mentality, because we are still very ignorant about how the brain functions.
So the word "Insane" gets thrown around a lot, in a casual, metaphorical sort of way.

In any case, I think that's not what people usually mean by saying "Hitler was insane". They mean literally, clinically, insane. That is, insane independently of his views on the Jews. If anti-Semitism was insane, then a large part of German society was insane.
Of course, if you're just using "insane" to mean terrible, awful, horrible, bad, evil ... well, okay, but it's not a good idea to fuzz up the meaning of words like that.
For one thing, it lets Hitler and his fellow mass-murderers off the hook: insanity has been a legal defense when accused of capital crimes for over 200 years.

 

The left is a UK ambassador?

 

Those weren't our key allies and the countries are what he said they are.

 

I think our reading skills, making use of the redundancy of English and our pattern-matching abilities, are being tested here. I parsed that as "Imagine the Left iF a UK ambassador had said something bad about Obama" ... in which case, it would have depended on what the ambassador actually said, and in particular, if it were true. The hurtful thing about what the British ambassador said is that is true. But in modern society, we learn from a very early age, not to notice certain truths, and even to deny them, in order not to hurt peoples' feelings, and to maintain social peace.

 

Nice try. Of course that isn't what your post actually said. You conveniently left out the " is" . Do try at least to be a bit intellectually honest!

 

Another point. If 'sanity' means 'conforming to social norms', then genocide has actually been sane for most of the history of mankind. ('Genocide' is one of those words whose meaning gets expanded beyond its original, technical meaning, for political convenience. Let's just say that sustained mass murder of 'others' -- sometimes different races, sometimes different clans, sometimes different religious groups -- has actually been, if not the human norm, at least very common, everywhere in the world.

Our savage ancestors, and backward peoples today, lack this concept. For them, the idea that, having your enemy at your mercy, you don't slaughter them all (or at least slaughter the males), would be considered by them, 'insane'.

The idea that different tribal groups should live together in peace, even within a common polity, is a modern concept, an achievement of civilization.

We began to advance towards civilization when, instead of killing our enemies, we enslaved them, or incorporated them into our empire. We took a further step forward when we began to (officially) treat individuals as individuals, regardless of their group membership.

In one sense, the Nazis represented an atavistic retreat into the primitive, and in fact that sort of mysticism was popular among the Nazis. At the same time, they had the resources of an advanced society with which to carry out their plans, proving the truth of Macaulay's observation that nothing is worse than the power of civilization, without its mercy.

 

It wasn't my post.

 

They have? As far as I know, they only regret it was leaked. They do not regret the content.
Trump does look like a fool. The ambassadors job is to make the content. He did an excellent job.
And no doubt he is being thanked, gets a nice summer vacation now.
And than he's going to retire. I think he's 65.

 

Somebody disloyal to the ambassador leaked and cost him his job. He is disgraced, but he'll be okay.

The ambassador's friends should now ferret out the leaker(s) and make a harsh example of them.

 

Why does everyone assume that the person who leaked the emails must be British? Most ambassadors live in the host country and will send info back to their native country using their host country's network. IMO, most likely the leaker works in the White House or by someone very close to the WH

 

The loudmouth ambassador has resigned, excellent. Who's next?

 

The former Ambassador described the White House as "inept" and "incompetent".
Hands up, all who believe he will be replaced by an Ambassador who believes the White House (Mr Trump and his team) are able, and competent.
Okay,
Hands up, all who believe he will be replaced by an Ambassador with the same opinions as the previous one re. Trump, but who will not put them in writing.

 

Nothing new, European socialists despise conservatives. They marched against Reagan by the hundreds of thousands.

 

Yeah, sure, that's why they'll come to the conclusion that trump is inept

 

I'm sort of laughing at the biased liberals here who are trying to pretend there are no biased liberals in the UK also

 

This is certainly true.

But remember, these Ambassadors are being appointed by a Conservative government, albeit one where all of its members believe in the Theory of Evolution.

There is a difference in hating/despising the politics of a leader, and thinking he is a petulant impulsive child.

There are a lot of people who hate/despise Mr Putin -- no one thinks he is a Russian Trump, in terms of his intellect.

And yes, they hated Reagan. And he was no intellectual giant. But they hated him for his unremitting anti-Communism, directed first of all against Russia. (Pro-Russian parties in France and Italy got 30% or more of the vote, and a substantial part of the intellectual class were 'soft on Communism' in Europe. Lots of Germans feared becoming Schlagfeldt Deutschland because of Reagan's Cruise Missiles and prized their 'Opening to the East'. None of this applies today.)

No one thinks Trump is hard on Russia. In fact, the problem is to try to figure out just what his policies are, but that's probably an impossible assignment.

But Ambassadors are men 'sent abroad to lie for the good of their country', and I am sure the new British one will not deviate from that definition.

 

Silly statement considering the leaks that have occurred of classified US documents.