This is about the Paris Agreement, but not really about its merits (which I believe are nil).

The international response press coverage have badly misinterpreted the events surrounding America's entry and exit of the climate agreement. Foreign governments predictably have either responded with words to aggrandize their own political stances or words to undermine American prestige. Press coverage has mainly and predictably focused on foreign response, interviews with environmental activists, coverage of local and state political response, and the response of various industries.

All of these really undermine America's standing in the world.

Withdrawing from the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.

Entering the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.

This affair, in essence is Obama saying **** you to the incoming president and trolling him for a response. Trump's response was a **** you to Obama and he fell into what was intended to be a political trap. As both of these infantile so-called leaders.

It is bad, but nothing new, when our politicians harm the country with their antics, but it's a sideshow internationally. It's ridiculous when our international standing is damaged with petty, insignificant, and ineffective internal squabbling between politicians. It is likely that this will be limited to incurring the wrath of hippies worldwide. One of the things I heard about the agreement is that parties are obligated to remain in the agreement for three years before they are permitted to withdraw. If this were a pseudo-treaty of more consequence - with actual obligations and repercussions of consequence - then this sort of gamesmanship could do real harm.

As for the foreign leaders - Merkel in particular, as well as leaders in Japan and Korea and France - anyone that advocates shutting down nuclear plants en masse has no business claiming to be for the environment, for carbon reduction, and against climate change. Merkel got away with a lot this past week - questioning America's commitment to their security and saying they need to buckle up and pay their own way, and then hammering Trump on the climate agreement, which doesn't mean anything on its own, while at the same time ramping up coal in favor of (nearly) carbon-free nuclear power. It's not hard to slap her down, and yet Trump really lost control of the narrative, and to what end?

(06-02-2017 10:57 AM)I45owl Wrote:  This is about the Paris Agreement, but not really about its merits (which I believe are nil).
The international response press coverage have badly misinterpreted the events surrounding America's entry and exit of the climate agreement. Foreign governments predictably have either responded with words to aggrandize their own political stances or words to undermine American prestige. Press coverage has mainly and predictably focused on foreign response, interviews with environmental activists, coverage of local and state political response, and the response of various industries.
All of these really undermine America's standing in the world.
Withdrawing from the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.
Entering the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.
This affair, in essence is Obama saying **** you to the incoming president and trolling him for a response. Trump's response was a **** you to Obama and he fell into what was intended to be a political trap. As both of these infantile so-called leaders.
It is bad, but nothing new, when our politicians harm the country with their antics, but it's a sideshow internationally. It's ridiculous when our international standing is damaged with petty, insignificant, and ineffective internal squabbling between politicians. It is likely that this will be limited to incurring the wrath of hippies worldwide. One of the things I heard about the agreement is that parties are obligated to remain in the agreement for three years before they are permitted to withdraw. If this were a pseudo-treaty of more consequence - with actual obligations and repercussions of consequence - then this sort of gamesmanship could do real harm.
As for the foreign leaders - Merkel in particular, as well as leaders in Japan and Korea and France - anyone that advocates shutting down nuclear plants en masse has no business claiming to be for the environment, for carbon reduction, and against climate change. Merkel got away with a lot this past week - questioning America's commitment to their security and saying they need to buckle up and pay their own way, and then hammering Trump on the climate agreement, which doesn't mean anything on its own, while at the same time ramping up coal in favor of (nearly) carbon-free nuclear power. It's not hard to slap her down, and yet Trump really lost control of the narrative, and to what end?

Good analysis.

Macron is now Merkels lapdog for Germany's conquer of Europe

The EU is too big for its britches right now. Its unelected semi-aristocratic bureaucratic class are arrogant with the inherited "noblesse-oblige" and "divine right". When things do not go their way they whine, they mock, they chastise, they preach, they lecture. They stick those noses in the air in disdain.

The EU doesn't "owe" us for saving their butts twice, staying for 50 years to save their butts, paying to rebuild them after THEIR war and defending them at our cost. They don't "owe" us.

But it would be intelligent for them to recognize that it might be necessary someday for the uncultured people who had to come save their butts twice before....do it again. It would be intelligent to treat them with some level of respect when they disagree with your undemocratic schemes and decline to participate in them.

And its not just us.

They essentially forced the British people to vote Brexit with their incessant scolding, threats, and unwillingness to accept limits to their "authority".

What sort of diplomacy is this? Did they think publicly mocking Trump was going to convince him to firmly support Article 5 of the NATO Charter a few hours later? Did they think that making threats about what they would do to Britain during a BREXIT would convince the British to stay with them? Did they think that publicly insulting Trump's intelligence hours before his decision on the Paris Accord would help them get the outcome they wanted? What is wrong with them?

They were at war with Greece (their own member) over finance, they were at war with the Irish over the EU Constitution, they are currently at war with eastern members over refugee policies. They are seriously inflexible. Everything is a pronouncement from Brussels.

They are like kids playing at being "superpower".

Wow! I am really amazed at the intelligence of the posters of this site. Many of you could be columnists for any major newspaper. You guys always hit it on-point with your posts. I have actually gained a bit of intelligence, wisdom, and a better world view from you. I have many favorites whose opinions I favor more, unfortunately, I also have those that I couldn't give a rip about. Now I know why I'm addicted to the Spin Room. I've gained so much insight of the world since before I started.

Thank you all wise ones.

(06-02-2017 11:37 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Macron is now Merkels lapdog for Germany's conquer of Europe

Did he hit a nerve?

He's just trying to school Trump on how it's done. He's having a field day with Trump.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/macr...li=BBnb7Kz

(06-02-2017 12:00 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 11:37 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Macron is now Merkels lapdog for Germany's conquer of Europe

Did he hit a nerve?

He's just trying to school Trump on how it's done. He's having a field day with Trump.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/macr...li=BBnb7Kz

Not at all. Laughing at him actually. Kinda sad macron is the dems tough guy.

(06-02-2017 10:57 AM)I45owl Wrote:  Withdrawing from the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.

Entering the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.

I said it before, and I will say it again. Us in the Paris accords did more damage to the environment than us pulling out. THey had not teeth and were not even ratified by the senate in the US.

At least now we can try to put something together (either by ourselves or a multilateral solution) that works. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise and shook up the globalist elite.

It was one of his better moves.

(06-02-2017 12:00 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 11:37 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Macron is now Merkels lapdog for Germany's conquer of Europe

Did he hit a nerve?
He's just trying to school Trump on how it's done. He's having a field day with Trump.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/macr...li=BBnb7Kz

Honestly, I think Macron is the destructive construction that I hoped Trump might provide. I think he's actually a pretty interesting leader, although a bit left of what I'd like.

(06-02-2017 12:14 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 10:57 AM)I45owl Wrote:  Withdrawing from the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.
Entering the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.

I said it before, and I will say it again. Us in the Paris accords did more damage to the environment than us pulling out. THey had not teeth and were not even ratified by the senate in the US.
At least now we can try to put something together (either by ourselves or a multilateral solution) that works. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise and shook up the globalist elite.
It was one of his better moves.

I don't think staying or leaving makes any substantial difference... I'm willing to be corrected as appropriate. It is regarded as a largely symbolic move. If it made a meaningful difference to our economy (versus just changing our declared goals under the treaty or not meeting those goals), then I'd agree with you. But if this is only symbolic, then what good comes from it?

(06-02-2017 01:07 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I don't think staying or leaving makes any substantial difference... I'm willing to be corrected as appropriate.

Stayming means one of two things

(1) A meaningless agreement stays in place and nothing gets fixed or (2) Paris was just the camels nose in the tent and they use language within it to go beyond what was agreed to (as globalist tend to do),

Quote:It is regarded as a largely symbolic move.

Yea, I see that. It's symbolic of "put something real, meaningful, and not disproportionately aimed at the US in place and we may sign on"

Quote:If it made a meaningful difference to our economy (versus just changing our declared goals under the treaty or not meeting those goals), then I'd agree with you.

See, I tend to worry about where these things go, not what they are today.

Quote:But if this is only symbolic, then what good comes from it?

Something better can be drafted and there is now a real pressure to do that.

(06-02-2017 01:21 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  Something better can be drafted and there is now a real pressure to do that.

The EU has already said....no renegotiation.

So it must not be that fricking important.

(06-02-2017 01:21 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  Something better can be drafted and there is now a real pressure to do that.

No.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(06-02-2017 01:23 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 01:21 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  Something better can be drafted and there is now a real pressure to do that.

The EU has already said....no renegotiation.

So it must not be that fricking important.

Yup....

(06-02-2017 01:21 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 01:07 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I don't think staying or leaving makes any substantial difference... I'm willing to be corrected as appropriate.

Stayming means one of two things
(1) A meaningless agreement stays in place and nothing gets fixed or (2) Paris was just the camels nose in the tent and they use language within it to go beyond what was agreed to (as globalist tend to do),

Quote:It is regarded as a largely symbolic move.

Yea, I see that. It's symbolic of "put something real, meaningful, and not disproportionately aimed at the US in place and we may sign on"

Quote:If it made a meaningful difference to our economy (versus just changing our declared goals under the treaty or not meeting those goals), then I'd agree with you.

See, I tend to worry about where these things go, not what they are today.

Quote:But if this is only symbolic, then what good comes from it?

Something better can be drafted and there is now a real pressure to do that.

Reading through the other thread and other information, one important point that I didn't appreciate when I drafted the OP is the financial obligation that the agreement pushed on the US. I agree that a better agreement could be reached, but am concerned that it is a moot point where other countries may not be willing to participate.

(06-02-2017 12:08 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 12:00 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 11:37 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Macron is now Merkels lapdog for Germany's conquer of Europe

Did he hit a nerve?

He's just trying to school Trump on how it's done. He's having a field day with Trump.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/macr...li=BBnb7Kz

Not at all. Laughing at him actually. Kinda sad macron is the dems tough guy.

You had better change that to tough person. Some snowflakes just dove into a safe space.

(06-02-2017 03:49 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I agree that a better agreement could be reached, but am concerned that it is a moot point where other countries may not be willing to participate.

Other countries that are just getting developed are not interested at all in stopping or delaying their acquisition of cars, golf courses, cell phones, neon lights, pre-processed cheese, and aircraft carriers.

So, any agreement that doesn't let them continue full speed ahead on those without restriction is dead on arrival.

(06-02-2017 11:49 AM)olliebaba Wrote:  Wow! I am really amazed at the intelligence of the posters of this site. Many of you could be columnists for any major newspaper. You guys always hit it on-point with your posts. I have actually gained a bit of intelligence, wisdom, and a better world view from you. I have many favorites whose opinions I favor more, unfortunately, I also have those that I couldn't give a rip about. Now I know why I'm addicted to the Spin Room. I've gained so much insight of the world since before I started.

Thank you all wise ones.

Co-sign! I feel smarter for reading posts like this one from the OP and Owls numbers responses - someone I have longed admired - until I try to participate, lol. I don't consider myself as unintelligent but I sure can't make a point as succinctly and articulately as most everyone here, and nothing like the above.

(06-02-2017 12:08 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 12:00 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 11:37 AM)shere khan Wrote:  Macron is now Merkels lapdog for Germany's conquer of Europe

Did he hit a nerve?

He's just trying to school Trump on how it's done. He's having a field day with Trump.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/macr...li=BBnb7Kz

Not at all. Laughing at him actually. Kinda sad macron is the dems tough guy.

french and tough are mutually exclusive...

(06-02-2017 01:07 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 12:14 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(06-02-2017 10:57 AM)I45owl Wrote:  Withdrawing from the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.
Entering the agreement was political posturing - it was unnecessary and ill-advised, and intended to play to the President's political base.

I said it before, and I will say it again. Us in the Paris accords did more damage to the environment than us pulling out. THey had not teeth and were not even ratified by the senate in the US.
At least now we can try to put something together (either by ourselves or a multilateral solution) that works. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise and shook up the globalist elite.
It was one of his better moves.

I don't think staying or leaving makes any substantial difference... I'm willing to be corrected as appropriate. It is regarded as a largely symbolic move. If it made a meaningful difference to our economy (versus just changing our declared goals under the treaty or not meeting those goals), then I'd agree with you. But if this is only symbolic, then what good comes from it?

It sets us up with an advantage in renegotiating the terms of the agreement? He's announced his willingness to renegotiate the deal.