Ok so 1. as I said. Resource crunch coming. 2. You said nothing really there. The "Singularity" will change everything. Hopefully more like 'She' than the other movies however the purpose of organic life does seem to be to start artificial. 3. Yep, you do sound like you are wearing a unicorn sweater. I have an expectation we get off the rock but we have a SERIOUSLY dangerous 20 years coming up. A.I. is not like how a knife or a gun is dangerous but like how a brick wall across an interstate is dangerous. Nuclear stuff is a new threat to you, its old hat stuff to my generation. Seen all the movies, all the contemporary documentaries and drank coffee in kitchens till dawn discussing how it might just end any moment. MAD kept us safe. We have had the longest run of peace for the largest number of people in history. Trump is fabricating threats to get support, creating an illusion of enemies at the gate for frightened fools. It is he who will make things batshit and risk us all.
All I'm saying is that enemy casualties in a defended position hardly proves Trump is being hard on Russia or Putin.
Reply below: "Slartibartfast, post: 4669634, member: 500061"] Ok so 1. as I said. Resource crunch coming. You may be right, but technology and engineering improvement usually allows us to become more resource efficient and thus reduce resources needed for a given item. However, a rising standard of living on a global basis would mean more resources get consumed. Energy is really the key resource. If you have an ample supply of energy, most other resources can be obtained such as being able to effectively mine low grade ores or utilize marginal land. We actually do have ample energy supplies for this planet, allowing for current population growth rate and improved overall standard of living for at least the next 200 years. From relatively abundant thorium based nuclear power, clean coal, ocean energy, bioenergy, shale oil, methane clathrates, and reprocessed nuclear waste that we currently bury, we really are not an energy poor planet. All of these mentioned energy sources are being either used now or are part of a specific implementation strategy by some countries. At long as you have energy, you have pure water through desalinization. As long as you have pure water, you can grow food on marginal land. Yes we are talking about huge projects. Where there is energy, there is a way forward. Genetic engineering and artificial intelligence will allow us to utilize our resources more efficiently as well. We will have better performing materials and products as a result. Some of the materials required for these new products will need to be of extremely high purity and may need very specialized manufacturing techniques and environments such as micro gravity in low Earth orbit. It is too expensive for a single country to start exotic manufacturing in space on an industrial scale. Cooperation among nation is key to realizing our potential as a species. 2. You said nothing really there. The "Singularity" will change everything. Hopefully more like 'She' than the other movies however the purpose of organic life does seem to be to start artificial. 3. Yep, you do sound like you are wearing a unicorn sweater. I have an expectation we get off the rock but we have a SERIOUSLY dangerous 20 years coming up. A.I. is not like how a knife or a gun is dangerous but like how a brick wall across an interstate is dangerous. Nuclear stuff is a new threat to you, its old hat stuff to my generation. Seen all the movies, all the contemporary documentaries and drank coffee in kitchens till dawn discussing how it might just end any moment. MAD kept us safe. I counted 11 close calls we had in having a nuclear war on Wikipedia.org. Now we have access to nanotechnology where we can kill people for pennies, access to space where we can drop a big rock on someone, biological weapons that either specifically target your immune system or kill you so fast your immune system has no chance, and chemicals that take six months to kill you, but you don't even know you've been attacked. Against this backdrop, friends first among nations may be a good strategy for our up and coming species. We have had the longest run of peace for the largest number of people in history. Trump is fabricating threats to get support, creating an illusion of enemies at the gate for frightened fools. It is he who will make things batshit and risk us all. Trump may be a bad boy, but he is not an evil nutjob. Look at his children. Most of them are well adjusted, positive, and productive people. I sure we are in agreement that the United States has several serious issues facing it. From Government not being responsible to the people to the increasing lack of ethics in business. Trump recognizes this and has publicly stated he will address some of the issues related to these problems. Trump is very good at reading people and situations. Trump's skills and focus are exactly what is needed to accomplish successful, long term peace treaties and solid economic growth policies. Trump also knows how to win, even when the odds are stacked way against him. If Trump "wins" on certain key issues that affect us all, this winning goes beyond him and the United States. The North Korea meeting may have a narrow path for success, but if we are able to navigate it correctly, there is potential to leverage this into world changing opportunity with China and Russia. If the major powers start working well together, there is no need to fight. Agreed?
It is a mistake, in my humble opinion, to use Trump's name and the word "Diplomatic" in the same sentence. If there is any diplomat here it would be Pompeo who is a smart and capable. Sadly, Pompeo is also a lying opportunist, devoid of any ethical principles on which to stand. The latter characteristics make him compatible with the Trump administration, by far the most corrupt in the Republic's history.
"Well, again John, there has been no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russians or Trump and Russians. No collusion. When I watch you interviewing all the people leaving their committees, I mean, the Democrats are all running for office, trying to say this that -- but bottom line, they all say there's no collusion. And there is no collusion. And when you talk about interviews, Hillary Clinton had an interview, where she wasn't sworn in, she wasn't given the oath, they didn't take notes, they didn't record and it was done on the 4th of July weekend. That's perhaps ridiculous and a lot of people looked upon that as being a very serious breach and it really was. But again I'll speak to attorneys -- I can only say this, there was absolutely no collusion. Everybody knows it. Every committee -- I've been in office now for 11 months. For 11 months, they've had this phony cloud over this administration, over our government. And it has hurt our government. It does hurt our government. It's a Democrat hoax that was brought up as an excuse for losing an election that frankly the Democrats should have won because they have such a tremendous advantage in the electoral college. So it was brought up for that reason. But it has been determined that there is no collusion and by virtually everybody. So we'll see what happens. We'll see what happens. I mean certainly we'll see what happens -- when they have no collusion and nobody's found any collusion at any level it seems unlikely that you'd even have an interview." - Trump, January 2018
Below, I will discuss the techniques Trump uses to get excellent reads on people and situations. I am basing my opinions about what Trump said in this interview, upon personal experience. When I am in a "get it done" and problem solving mode or in a negotiating situation, I will be animated, talk fast, and evaluate the information I gather from the person I am talking to. From the information gathered, I will be able to evaluate what is important to that person, what he knows or don't knows about a subject or situation, and his general comfort level. From this information, I will either develop a negotiation plan or evaluate the information recieved for follow up questions. Disclosures: I am not a psychologist and do not know Trump in person and certainly don't know the details of his personality that I would get get from knowing him personally for years. In addition, because the words here do not provide information on speaking tempo, tonal inflection, or gesturing it makes my analysis more speculative. Also I do not know if Trump is speaking to a single person, a camera, or a group of people. It does appear Trump is being interviewed by single person and is in front of a camera, however. Also, I am unable to see the interviewer's reaction, body language, or expressions. It is said 90% of communications is non verbal. If you look at Trump when he is speaking to an audience, such as when he was campaigning, you can see he is very focused and responsive to the reactions of the audience. He will see Trump respond to the reactions of a single member of the audience or the general reaction to the audience. With the disclosure above in mind, I will now annotate trump's words with his apparent techniques and reasoning behind Trump's statements below. "exGOPer, post: 4669707, member: 327981"]"Well, again John, there has been no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russians or Trump and Russians. Here Trump mentions a first name, implying he is being interviewed. Trump repeats himself here probably because he is thinking of different possibilities of what the investigation covers. No collusion. Trump is saying this either to emphasize his point or to see the reaction of the interviewer. Does the interviewer's expression change? Does he shift uncomfortably in his seat? Is the interviewer getting impatient? When I watch you interviewing all the people leaving their committees, I mean, the Democrats are all running for office, trying to say this that -- but bottom line, they all say there's no collusion. This statement appears a bit rediculous, given the fervor by the Left over the accusation. Trump is using this outrageous statement to in attempt to get the interviewer to have a reaction. How the interviewer reacts may give Trump information how to proceed. In addition, the interviewer may be tempted to provide Trump more information, if he has any, to counter Trump's "crazy" statement. And there is no collusion. And when you talk about interviews, Hillary Clinton had an interview, where she wasn't sworn in, she wasn't given the oath, they didn't take notes, they didn't record and it was done on the 4th of July weekend. To paraphrase what Trump is saying here: "We are wasting time here and you don't provide the same standards for Hiliary as to me". That's perhaps ridiculous and a lot of people looked upon that as being a very serious breach and it really was. But again I'll speak to attorneys -- I can only say this, there was absolutely no collusion. I am assuming the interviewer has been remaining fairly deadpan in this interview so far and Trump is continuing to press him for a reaction or additional information. Everybody knows it. Every committee -- I've been in office now for 11 months. For 11 months, they've had this phony cloud over this administration, over our government. Trump is emphasizing there is absolutely nothing here. He is challenging the interviewer as in: "If you have anything, let's hear it". And it has hurt our government. It does hurt our government. It's a Democrat hoax that was brought up as an excuse for losing an election that frankly the Democrats should have won because they have such a tremendous advantage in the electoral college. This sounds like Trump understands full well what is going on, both in why the Democrats have created the collusion investigation and the realities of the election results. So it was brought up for that reason. But it has been determined that there is no collusion and by virtually everybody. So we'll see what happens. We'll see what happens. I mean certainly we'll see what happens -- when they have no collusion and nobody's found any collusion at any level it seems unlikely that you'd even have an interview." - Trump, January 2018 This last statement may be a final call to the interviewer: "If you have anything, let's hear it." When I think about why people do the things they do, why various cultures have the wide variety of customs they do, or why corporate policy is the way it is, I assume there is a solid underlying reason for it, even if it does not appear to make sense to me on the outset. This helps me see what's going on while minimizing my personal biases that could affect objectivity. Trump's communication style has evolved to this level because needs to quickly evaluate whether the person he is speaking to has any worthwhile information or to determine what their negotiating position is. Trump makes lots of decisions per day, if not per hour, and needs a way to efficiently get things done. The like is for you bringing up this very important idea. We are in good hands with Trump negotiating with North Korea and beyond. He may have to "switch gears" a bit in some situations with his counterparts, especially in the beginning, because they value understanding the details of the person before agreeing to commitments. If Trump has the patience to develop a solid relationship with Kim, there is no telling how far this could end up going after this and future meetings with North Korea and eventually with related meetings with China and Russia.
Trump is hoping to define Russia as a friend because if it were an 'enemy' his actions would fall into the realm of treason. "By 1965, capital punishment had been abolished for almost all crimes, but was still mandatory (unless the offender was pardoned or the sentence commuted) for high treason until 1998. By section 36 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 the maximum punishment for high treason became life imprisonment." He can't be his own judge so he can't pardon himself and accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt.