Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

A View from the Outside

SW is a US based operation. So its only reasonable that the American perspective is heavily represented. But when you cut to the chase, Americans represent less than 5% of the worlds people. Certainly the most morbidly obese, (and seemingly proud of it) well armed and self congratulating 5%.. But still only 5%. So I think its only fair that Americans get get a view of how others from the outside see them and their views on current events withing America, as seem from outside. Even Americans admit how poorly news and current events are being reported within America. So think of it as my "Public Service"
Lets start with this:
A few thousand National guardsmen and several hundred Marines march into Los Angeles uninvited by the state (due process ignored) and unwanted by the governor. Now from an outside perspective, should they be there? But skipping over that.. It would seem that the federal authorities have put "the right people" in place of the military and the national guard to have those orders followed without anyone questioning if the orders were indeed legal. So if any state now does something Donald objects to, he can put down the "insurrection" using the military, whether it is legal or not and the state can do nothing about it..
Thats how it looks from here..😷
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Thinkerbell · 41-45, F
Whoever you initially responded to seems to have blocked me, so I can't respond directly under your last comment to me.

"My point was that people are now in place who will not refuse an order from Trump, just because it is illegal or unconstitutional."

It remains to be seen whether Trump's order is illegal or unconstitutional; that may have to be settled in court, perhaps by the Supreme Court.

What is undoubtedly true is that the rioters interfered with ICE, and that there is a California law that prevents the local police from aiding ICE, so the question is can a recalcitrant governor of a state prevent the enforcement of federal law? I think that question was settled a long time ago when the feds forcibly integrated a school in Arkansas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rock_Nine
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@Thinkerbell Yes. I believe that was the last time the National guard was used without the invitation of the State. And while being on the other side of history in that one, its still a question of legal overreach.. (And the person you are looking for is otherwise known as the Alaskan Brown Bear)😷
Thinkerbell · 41-45, F
@whowasthatmaskedman

Well, Newsom is suing, so at some point we should get a decision on whether or not Trump is overreaching.

Oh, the irony... at one time it was only the Dixiecrats who howled "states' rights!" Now a more recent incarnation of Democrat seems to be doing the same. 🤭
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@Thinkerbell I completely agree with you. We an argue about the reasons. But it happened. And now "Y'all" are going to pay for it...And having p*$$ed off all your friends and allies, you are going to go it alone...😷
calicuz · 56-60, M
@Thinkerbell

You seem to have forgotten a few things.

1: No legislation has been presented to congress to vote on, so the President can sign legislation into law. So it is in fact, the White House and ICE that are breaking the law, because Executive Orders are not law.

2: All 50 states still have their sauvrenty, and only are required to follow Federal law that has been sent to the President's desk to sign into law. Once again, the White House is violating the law by violating the State of California's sauvrenty, by a flawed philosophy that Executive Orders are law.

3: We are a self governing people who govern ourselves within the confines of the law. The White House has presented no legislation to sign into law that any American can govern themselves by.
Thinkerbell · 41-45, F
@calicuz

1. ICE enforces over 400 federal statutes, regarding (for example) customs violations, immigration enforcement, terrorism prevention, and trafficking, all of which have long since been legislated and signed into federal law.

2. The 50 sovereign states do not have the right to interfere with ICE enforcement of established federal laws, which is likely what is going on in California right now. As I mentioned to the Masked Rider of the Outback above, Newsom is bringing suit on the very question of whether or not ICE and/or Trump have overstepped their authority under federal law, and that will be decided in court, probably the Supreme Court, and not by some low-level district judge in Massachusetts or wherever.

3. See (1) above.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@Thinkerbell And diplomatically I agree with you.. But economically I dont. The world has been tethered to America in trade and banking by the $US. So to be frank about it, everyone had to put up with your $h*T. But the continuing profligate ways of the US, compounded by the contined printing of $US with no value behind it has opened the door to BRICS and in particular the Chinese. And the sun is setting on the $US. And Trump is doing the rest.
A small side note. The AUKUS sub deal was originally dreamed up by the US to relieve the pressure on the US navy, having to covering the South China sea from America. The sticking point being that we are non nuclear defence force. So we bend our own posture to accomodate the US and spend billions to buy some of the US used subs. Then the price goes up (no surprise. This is America) Then doubts arise as to whether America can deliver. (no surprise) and then Australia sanctions two hard right Israeli ministers for Rejecting all aid from getting into Gaza. Freezing their assets here. (What business Israelis politicians have keeping assets in OZ is anyones guess) Next thing we here is the Secretary of BS, Marco Rubio is condemning us for acting against these Israeli right wingers and calling for an investigation into the AUKUS deal (which it is starting to look like America couldnt deliver anyway. You know what? Keep your subs. We will keep the billions you wanted for them and you can keep patrolling the south China sea yourselves. Britain and france (and the germans and Japanese) all have perfectly good subs we can buy off the lot..😷