MAGAThread XIII: The Summit of Putin

[Unstoppable Empire of Doom]

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/674505002

lol this made me laugh.

[Vassenor]

Also Trump apparently couldn't even lower himself to sing America The Beautiful at an event.

America the what?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_the_Beautiful

[Oil exporting People]

They do, hence why this is the pot calling the kettle black.

The EU isn't objecting to US tarrifs on China. The EU is objecting to US tarrifs on its allies.

Which is irrelevant given they're doing the exact same behavior. Further, why Trump hit them with tariffs is blatantly obvious.

[Ifreann]

The EU isn't objecting to US tarrifs on China. The EU is objecting to US tarrifs on its allies.

Which is irrelevant given they're doing the exact same behavior. Further, why Trump hit them with tariffs is blatantly obvious.

Because someone told him to? Because he thought it would make him look strong? Because he's mad at the EU for some inane reason?

[The Empire of Pretantia]

America the what?

You know the one. Beautiful something something skies, amber waves of grain.

I'd be outraged if it was the National Anthem he didn't sing, but not even I remember the lyrics to America the Beautiful.

[Ifreann]

You know the one. Beautiful something something skies, amber waves of grain.

I'd be outraged if it was the National Anthem he didn't sing, but not even I remember the lyrics to America the Beautiful.

Do you think he knows the words to your national anthem? I don't.

[Petrasylvania]

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/674505002

lol this made me laugh.

Would have been even funnier if Donnie was bawling "Get those sons of bitches out of here!"

[The Empire of Pretantia]

I'd be outraged if it was the National Anthem he didn't sing, but not even I remember the lyrics to America the Beautiful.

Do you think he knows the words to your national anthem? I don't.

Bet.

[Oil exporting People]

Which is irrelevant given they're doing the exact same behavior. Further, why Trump hit them with tariffs is blatantly obvious.

Because someone told him to? Because he thought it would make him look strong? Because he's mad at the EU for some inane reason?

Or, and I'm just putting this out there, it might be explained in that link.

[Ifreann]

Because someone told him to? Because he thought it would make him look strong? Because he's mad at the EU for some inane reason?

Or, and I'm just putting this out there, in might be explained in that link.

I wouldn't credit Trump with anything more than a superficial understanding of the situation.

[Oil exporting People]

Or, and I'm just putting this out there, in might be explained in that link.

I wouldn't credit Trump with anything more than a superficial understanding of the situation.

Congratulations, here's your logical fallacy.

[Ifreann]

I wouldn't credit Trump with anything more than a superficial understanding of the situation.

Congratulations, here's your logical fallacy.

Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.

This does not accurately describe my post. I'm not suggesting that anything in that article is untrue, not least because, lacking a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, I haven't read it. I'm saying that Donald Trump is a stupid, lazy, egotist. He is the kind of person who believes that he just instinctively understands everything important about international trade, and wouldn't be willing to put any more time and effort into analysing the impacts of tariffs than it takes to consult his own instincts. So an analysis of how China gets around US tariffs is not realistically going to be part of his decision-making process.

You seem familiar with the site. Is there a yourfallacyis entry for dismissing someone's point on the basis of your own false belief that their reasoning is fallacious?

[Vassenor]

Congratulations, here's your logical fallacy.

Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.

This does not accurately describe my post. I'm not suggesting that anything in that article is untrue, not least because, lacking a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, I haven't read it. I'm saying that Donald Trump is a stupid, lazy, egotist. He is the kind of person who believes that he just instinctively understands everything important about international trade, and wouldn't be willing to put any more time and effort into analysing the impacts of tariffs than it takes to consult his own instincts. So an analysis of how China gets around US tariffs is not realistically going to be part of his decision-making process.

You seem familiar with the site. Is there a yourfallacyis entry for dismissing someone's point on the basis of your own false belief that their reasoning is fallacious?

Funny you should mention that...

[Ism]

This does not accurately describe my post. I'm not suggesting that anything in that article is untrue, not least because, lacking a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, I haven't read it. I'm saying that Donald Trump is a stupid, lazy, egotist. He is the kind of person who believes that he just instinctively understands everything important about international trade, and wouldn't be willing to put any more time and effort into analysing the impacts of tariffs than it takes to consult his own instincts. So an analysis of how China gets around US tariffs is not realistically going to be part of his decision-making process.

You seem familiar with the site. Is there a yourfallacyis entry for dismissing someone's point on the basis of your own false belief that their reasoning is fallacious?

Funny you should mention that...

Ah, you beat me to it.

[Oil exporting People]

This does not accurately describe my post. I'm not suggesting that anything in that article is untrue, not least because, lacking a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, I haven't read it. I'm saying that Donald Trump is a stupid, lazy, egotist. He is the kind of person who believes that he just instinctively understands everything important about international trade, and wouldn't be willing to put any more time and effort into analysing the impacts of tariffs than it takes to consult his own instincts. So an analysis of how China gets around US tariffs is not realistically going to be part of his decision-making process.

No, it fits your post perfectly to a T, in that your own personal bias leads you to conclude there is no way he can form a coherent trade policy despite this being his main issue since the 1980s.

You seem familiar with the site. Is there a yourfallacyis entry for dismissing someone's point on the basis of your own false belief that their reasoning is fallacious?

No, no there is not.

[Ifreann]

This does not accurately describe my post. I'm not suggesting that anything in that article is untrue, not least because, lacking a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, I haven't read it. I'm saying that Donald Trump is a stupid, lazy, egotist. He is the kind of person who believes that he just instinctively understands everything important about international trade, and wouldn't be willing to put any more time and effort into analysing the impacts of tariffs than it takes to consult his own instincts. So an analysis of how China gets around US tariffs is not realistically going to be part of his decision-making process.

No, it fits your post perfectly to a T, in that your own personal bias leads you to conclude there is no way he can form a coherent trade policy despite this being his main issue since the 1980s.

The fallacy you linked to is about claiming something isn't true because I don't personally understand it. I have not made any such claim.

You seem familiar with the site. Is there a yourfallacyis entry for dismissing someone's point on the basis of your own false belief that their reasoning is fallacious?

No, no there is not.

Maybe you should ask them about adding it. Wouldn't want your toolbox of fallacies to be incomplete.

[Oil exporting People]

The fallacy you linked to is about claiming something isn't true because I don't personally understand it. I have not made any such claim.

> Because you did not use the exact language, you are not guilty of a fallacy

So I take it you do not understand what logical reasoning is, then?

Maybe you should ask them about adding it. Wouldn't want your toolbox of fallacies to be incomplete.

It is not my problem that others need myself to compensate for their rhetorical lackings.

[Farnhamia]

Fallacies to the right of them, fallacies to the left of them, volleyed and thundered. Get back on topic.

[Tobleste]

Or the EU has it's own problems with China separate from the US?

They do, hence why this is the pot calling the kettle black.

Maybe that shows that if Trumps priority was China (and if he had half a brain), he could work with the EU to pressurise China. Instead he's passed pretty blunt tariffs and pissed everybody off and showed he doesn't know what he's doing.

Except that ignores the fact China is the priority and he's got exactly what he needed from the EU by doing this; they're taking the Chinese to the WTO for dumping as well and about to enact their own tariffs on Beijing. Trump handled this with absolute perfection.

1. No, they (the EU) have a problem with tariffs against them (i.e. not China) so it isn't the pot calling the kettle black.

2. I checked and all I could find was EU complaints about China stealing IP (Intellectual Property (i.e. not steel)) and apparently they want to be involved in the Chinese case against the US.

You obviously think Trump is a genius which is something I can't fix so I'll leave you to it.

[Oil exporting People]

1. No, they (the EU) have a problem with tariffs against them (i.e. not China) so it isn't the pot calling the kettle black.

It literally is.

2. I checked and all I could find was EU complaints about China stealing IP (Intellectual Property (i.e. not steel)) and apparently they want to be involved in the Chinese case against the US.

Quite right, was getting my news items mixed up.

You obviously think Trump is a genius which is something I can't fix so I'll leave you to it.

On Trade policy? Absolutely. The Chinese are already desperately attempting to fold, because otherwise Trump can break their spine.

[Vassenor]

So it seems the "national security" justification for tariffs against Canada basically boiled down to "But the War of 1812".

Trump really has no clue what he's doing here, does he?

[Oil exporting People]

So it seems the "national security" justification for tariffs against Canada basically boiled down to "But the War of 1812".

Trump really has no clue what he's doing here, does he?

Do you even bother to read what you post?

According to the sources, Trudeau pressed Trump on how he could justify the tariffs as a "national security" issue. In response, Trump quipped to Trudeau, "Didn't you guys burn down the White House?" referring to the War of 1812.

When asked if the comment was received as a joke, one source on the call said: "To the degree one can ever take what is said as a joke. The impact on Canada and ultimately on workers in the US won't be a laughing matter."

For one, there is no evidence of this phone call and even if it did happen, it apparently was a jest made during an argument. For those with an actual grasp on reality, review this Wall Street Journal article as well as the Commerce Department's report that started this; reason Canada got hit with tariffs is the Chinese use it, along with the EU and Mexico, to circumvent U.S. Anti-Dumping duties.

Edit: Also, for the record, I like how even CNN took the opportunity to fuck with the Canadians -

The problem with Trump's comments to Trudeau is that British troops burned down the White House during the War of 1812. Historians note the British attack on Washington was in retaliation for the American attack on York, Ontario, in territory that eventually became Canada, which was then a British colony.

[Petrasylvania]

So it seems the "national security" justification for tariffs against Canada basically boiled down to "But the War of 1812".

Trump really has no clue what he's doing here, does he?

Silly, he's playing Infinite-D Chess and us normies can't begin to grasp his thought process.

[Galloism]

So it seems the "national security" justification for tariffs against Canada basically boiled down to "But the War of 1812".

Trump really has no clue what he's doing here, does he?

Did Nationstates get elected suddenly?

[Oil exporting People]

So it seems the "national security" justification for tariffs against Canada basically boiled down to "But the War of 1812".

Trump really has no clue what he's doing here, does he?

Silly, he's playing Infinite-D Chess and us normies can't begin to grasp his thought process.

China offered to buy $70 Billion in U.S. Goods to get us to not level tariffs on them, and are slashing tariffs across the board.