So now our leaders are using the modern world of communicating

[robert k]

18 hours ago, topcat72m said:

I don' think it' the fact that social media is being used that's an issue. But the way it's being used is what's being discussed. 

I am not from US so I have no vested interests. I have to say there is allot I like about Trumps method of leadership. He often wears his colours on his sleeves. He is not afraid to tackle controversy. The world needs more of this straight talking and less PC crap. 

 

However most will agree that diplomatic relations are best not performed on social media. A leader of a powerful nation generally shouldn't pick fights with other nations (North Korea/ Russia) over the internet. There are ambassadors and diplomats for that. 

Not impressed with the diplomatic corps, I think they mainly exist in this day and age so countries can hide [shell game] their spies. Diplomats were necessary when communications were time consuming, these days world leaders can pick up a phone. Diplomacy has not stopped any wars as far as I can tell. I think any diplomacy success one could point to, I could point out a disparity of force where one or both sides merely didn't like their chances.

[Dave Hounddriver]

On 4/12/2018 at 3:40 AM, Jollygoodfellow said:

US President Donald Trump has warned Russia to "get ready" for missile strikes

So it happened as he "warned" and the US sent some missile strikes at "chemical weapons" targets.  Problem I have with that is the "chemical weapons" may be as ethereal as the "weapons of mass destruction" that others have tried to destroy.

Was this simply a "Believe what I Tweet!" strike?

Edit:  Here is the link to a story that just came out. 

Quote

58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.

 

Edited April 18, 2018 by Dave Hounddriver
Add Link

[popeye72 ]

4 hours ago, robert k said:

Not impressed with the diplomatic corps, I think they mainly exist in this day and age so countries can hide [shell game] their spies. Diplomats were necessary when communications were time consuming, these days world leaders can pick up a phone. Diplomacy has not stopped any wars as far as I can tell. I think any diplomacy success one could point to, I could point out a disparity of force where one or both sides merely didn't like their chances.

You and I don't know much about any success or otherwise because it' not done through the media. That the whole purpose of them. 

[OnMyWay]

9 hours ago, Mike J said:

When people post to social media there is a tendency to be spontaneous.   There is no real planning, proof reading, or advice from a third party.  The result is that a LOT of messages go out that do damage to the person writing them and once posted there is no getting it back.  This "shooting from the hip" is often the problem when politicians, and others in the public view, post to public forums without thinking through what they have written before the hit the "send" button.

Ready - Fire - Aim 

I think I read that Trump actually does have reviews of his tweets, most of the time.  If true, it must be some of his closest advisors who are nearby 24/7.  He may not follow the advice given, but he does run them by someone.  Anybody else read this?

[robert k]

3 minutes ago, topcat72m said:

You and I don't know much about any success or otherwise because it' not done through the media. That the whole purpose of them. 

What I have heard about them horrifies me, like presenting the Russians with a big red fake reset button? They thought we were idiots. Makes me wonder how many other stupid things have been done in the name of diplomacy that we didn't hear about? Possibly if we were aware of them we could stop the appointed people who made such gaffs from doing so again.

[OnMyWay]

2 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

So it happened as he "warned" and the US sent some missile strikes at "chemical weapons" targets.  Problem I have with that is the "chemical weapons" may be as ethereal as the "weapons of mass destruction" that others have tried to destroy.

Was this simply a "Believe what I Tweet!" strike?

 

No matter what means of communication is used, if a world leader draws a line in the sand and does not do as promised, they would be considered weak.  Perhaps if previous leaders had done something, thousands of Syrian lives could have been saved.

Trump's only out would might have been if he said they could not tie Assad to the chemical weapons attacks, but that was not likely.

[robert k]

3 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

So it happened as he "warned" and the US sent some missile strikes at "chemical weapons" targets.  Problem I have with that is the "chemical weapons" may be as ethereal as the "weapons of mass destruction" that others have tried to destroy.

Was this simply a "Believe what I Tweet!" strike?

 

You know those sabre rattling French. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=french+proof+of+syria+chemical+weapons

Edited April 14, 2018 by robert k

[Gerald Glatt]

Well done is done.  No nukes No russia shooting at US assets.  Trump doing as he said in campaign. China backing down from trade war 1000s of Walmart jobs saved.  Kim coming to US.  World thinks Trump crazy may press button, might be. NAFTA  renegotiated, Illegals crossing from Mexico down, war on opioids is working (not as well as RP) wall is starting.  Trump caves to libs on budget to spend on more guns. 

I don't follow on twitter as  CNN will let me know when feet are inserted into mouth.   The man is doomed because he has cut into too many paydays for other politicians. 

Watch what you wish for though,  Pence is just to the right of Hitler.

[Reboot]

1 hour ago, Gerald Glatt said:

Well done is done.  No nukes No russia shooting at US assets.  Trump doing as he said in campaign. China backing down from trade war 1000s of Walmart jobs saved.  Kim coming to US.  World thinks Trump crazy may press button, might be. NAFTA  renegotiated, Illegals crossing from Mexico down, war on opioids is working (not as well as RP) wall is starting.  Trump caves to libs on budget to spend on more guns. 

I remember how we were told the "little rocket man Kim" tweets on Trump's twitter were going to get us into nuclear WW3.

Instead we are getting this:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/17/north-and-south-korea-reportedly-set-to-announce-official-end-to-war.html

Edited April 17, 2018 by Reboot

[Reboot]

On 4/14/2018 at 3:35 AM, Dave Hounddriver said:

So it happened as he "warned" and the US sent some missile strikes at "chemical weapons" targets.  Problem I have with that is the "chemical weapons" may be as ethereal as the "weapons of mass destruction" that others have tried to destroy.

Was this simply a "Believe what I Tweet!" strike?

 

I too have my suspicions about the chemical attacks, alleged. My sense is that Trump didn't want to get involved at all, but his hand was somewhat forced. Anyway, it's been called a one off event without repeats (unless something happens again). Russians didn't seem to do anything to stop the op, and their assets were not targeted.