Sure we have checks and balances. Does that mean nobody should be critical. Its being critical which keeps the checks and balances functioning.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Former CIA Director John Brennan: "Our Future Is In Jeopardy"
- Thread starter metis
- Start date
It’s not just the CIA. It is also the FBI, NSA, the DHS, the Special Counsel, and corroboration by allies. Do you think that our intelligence agencies are so inept that they are all wrong about this? Or perhaps you believe in some unevidenced grand conspiracy where these staunchly conservative organizations are just making things up, and in a year and a half, no one has leaked?
Are they mistake proof? Of course not. But to claim that every single intelligence agency got this wrong is preposterous. If you don’t accept their findings, who do you accept? Do you have any evidence that they are wrong?
Stanyon
WWMRD?
Of course this would never be abused by any political party at anytime. What would be easier would be installing a program where designated block wardens would go house to house checking to see if a little sign that reminded people to not listen to anything other than what the party endorses is hanging from peoples radio knobs.
Stanyon
WWMRD?
I'm not the one pushing a conspiracy theory
Why are you denying the findings of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DHS, and Special Counsel?
Make it completely independent.
What is your solution to news media being allowed to present fictitious or unevidenced stories as news without repercussions? Do you think that it is acceptable that opinions are being presented as news?
I would prefer that allegations be specific and backed by verifiable evidence, not Cold War inspired rhetoric.
Computer hacking is a crime and should be dealt with on that level, if possible.
But the other allegations about troll farms and posting stuff on social media - anybody can do that. You can post stuff on the internet, I can post stuff on the internet. It's even open to foreigners with internet access.
How many non-Americans post here to this forum and give their political opinions on America? Shouldn't we be chiding them for attempting to influence internal American politics? That's exactly what we're doing regarding the Russians.
So, if I have any doubts, it's due to the lack of specificity and inconsistency regarding allegations of foreign influence in America.
To not care about their possible motivations would be a serious mistake on our part. We have to look at this more rationally, not emotionally.
Yeah, our system is at risk. We've had our democracy attacked before. There were allegations of Iranian dealings with the Reagan campaign in the 1980 election, rumors of Chinese money used to influence the 1996 election. Anyone with a bag full of money can influence politics and attack our democracy, but this is what we've allowed to happen.
We made ourselves vulnerable, although perhaps this might be enough to wake Americans up to the need for serious political and electoral reform in this country. Or maybe not, as it's much easier to blame the Russians while Americans continue to wallow in somnambulance.
Besides, there are too many politicians and influence peddlers who just looooove all that money, so they're too corrupted and politically entrenched to bring about any true reforms in this country. That's what should be unacceptable to Americans, and yet, we have what we have.
How do you know all this about the Russians and what they want? From my studies and travels to that country, my impression is that they're far more concerned with defense and national survival than conquering the world. They have a history of being invaded from all directions, and despite their massive size, they've been boxed in and encircled by other powers. This was exacerbated by the breakup of the Soviet Union which put them even more on the defensive.
About that, the US hasn't exactly been the most responsible or cooperative world citizen in recent decades, so maybe they have good reason to position themselves against the US. Even many Americans find fault with our foreign and military policy, so maybe we Americans should consider notching down our arrogant rhetoric and belief that we can do whatever we want in the world. We have over 800 military bases in more than 70 countries, so maybe we're a part of the problem here.
We can start by taking a less aggressive stance.
As for human rights and governing, the same could be said about Saudi Arabia (arguably far worse than both Russia and China), yet we consider them close allies and friends of the West. Or even China, with whom we've gotten along with and deal with, despite their human rights abuses. They are a "most favored nation."
If we can do that, then we can work with them on a more reasonable level. We can try to put ourselves in their shoes and try to see how they look at the world.
No, but I don't see that there's much we can do about it now. It's spilled milk. The only thing we can do now is shore up our own weaknesses within our system and try to prevent it from happening again. This would require serious and deep reforms in our political and electoral system, which I don't see happening anytime soon.
We've done things to them, too. Both Russia and China have longstanding historical reasons for having a grudge with America. That doesn't necessarily excuse what they did, but we should at least try to be fair, objective, and understanding that they might actually have grievances. It's not as if they've crashed planes into buildings or invaded America. We invaded their countries, both China and Russia, but they've never invaded us.
I don't even consider what they did as an actual "attack" as much as actively participate in the influence-peddling and money games which have been part and parcel of our political system. The French and the British tried to do that in our early days, but our solution to that was to refrain from permanent alliances and foreign entanglements, which was a cornerstone of US foreign policy up until the 20th century.
But now, we insist on being the predominant player on the world scene, a global leader embodied in Captain America righting all the world's wrongs. And then we wonder why other world powers might try to influence our government.
If we had just been staying at home and minding our own business, then maybe they wouldn't have "attacked" us. Just a thought. What they did was what Native American tribes might refer to as "counting coup." It may be bad, but it's not the end of the world. We can recover from this "attack."
Because unlike us, they have relatively recent memories of their country being devastated in two world wars. They stand to lose a great deal by fomenting chaos. On the other hand, we Americans have been mostly untouched by war and foreign invasion for numerous generations. We think we're untouchable and that nothing bad can ever happen to us, and that's where a lot of America's recklessness and myopia comes from.
Perhaps, although that would again point up the internal problems and divisions which already exist in America. If the country devours itself from within, then I daresay that most of the "devourers" would be Americans, not Russians.
Apart from that, if the situation does get that bad in America to the point where we fall apart into civil war or devouring ourselves from within, it would bring about more global instability and a shift in the balance of power which would not likely favor the Russians. With America out of the picture, there could be an even greater nationalist resurgence in Europe - particularly in Germany, which the Russians have some rather bad memories of.
I didn't say it changes anything, but the fact remains, it's that underlying anger which has been the main problem.
But it's not just the "foreign government" we're talking about, is it?
Yeah. That's the political system we have. Personally, I've always been put off by the endless partisan bickering and irrational hatred myself. My view is that neither side is really that committed to any true political principles; all they're concerned about is that their team wins.
What about all the foreign-born individuals working in our own media, government, academia, and other influential bodies and organizations in this country? Shouldn't they be scrutinized as well?
Apart from that, what you're referring to amounts to "dirty tricks," which may be bad, but again, they've been a significant part of how our political system has operated.
Sure, let's cry "foul" over the Russians doing it too, but let's not cry that loudly. We've already made our own bed in this regard - and have actively allowed foreigners into that bed. That the Russians have also jumped into that bed may be our misfortune, but it can be easily rectified, if Americans have the courage and the will to do so.
Sometimes, whenever I have a dispute with someone, I might try to take a step back, take a deep breath, and try to figure where they might be coming from. Everyone has a point of view and their individual view of the world and how it works. This is true for everyone, for Russians, Republicans, Chinese, members of ISIS, MS-13, the Sinaloa Cartel, the Freemasons, or the Elks Club.
I note that up above, you mentioned that "it's kinda hard to care" about the reasons or the motivations people might have for doing something. Because the anger over what they did is so great, it doesn't matter why. I would suggest that this is an incorrect approach to take. There's no reason to get angry or infuriated, as such emotions can cloud one's reasoning and make it difficult to arrive at a rational solution.
But as far as that goes, that's not really a conservative or liberal thing, as much as it's an American thing. In our culture and folklore, motives are given secondary consideration in favor of outrage at a wrongdoer over whatever crime they committed. We don't care why they did it, but they did it and deserve punishment. Occasionally, we'll give leniency to a battered wife who kills her abuser, but apart from that, we Americans can be very sanctimonious in our ideal that "justice must be served," regardless of the motives or reasons.
But sometimes we need to examine those reasons, which we've also shown ourselves as able to do - at least when we try to take the high road occasionally. Too bad we haven't done that lately. But maybe it's time we should.
It's their fault for putting politics ahead of principles.
Trump was nominated because enough Republicans voted for him in the primary elections. I don't believe that there was any Russian involvement in that. That was strictly an internal Republican affair. Even the other mainstream Republicans were staunchly against Trump, but the vote didn't go their way.
Hillary was tainted, had a lot of political baggage (mostly from her husband, on whose coattails she rode to gain public office in the first place). A lot of people supported her because they thought it was "Hillary's turn" to become president, or because they liked the idea of having a woman president and breaking through the glass ceiling. All of them more or less symbolic reasons which apparently lost sight of the real issues facing America in the here and now.
Her entire campaign was shameless pandering to elitist identity politics, while all but ignoring the countless millions of Americans out there struggling. The liberal Democrats have been so out of touch that they didn't even see this coming. And yes, with all due respect, that is their fault. Some Democrats, like Sanders, Ralph Nader, Jerry Brown, and many others outside the mainstream have tried to fight the good fight, only to get gummed up and obstructed by the likes of Clinton.
No, but I think it would be wiser to deal with those internal problems as a top priority.
A lot of what goes on is what's been going on for centuries. Political intrigue in Europe, factionalism, influencing, interference at the highest levels of power. It's been their favorite pastime in Europe. Initially, America wanted to opt out of that system by eschewing alliances, foreign entanglements and the idea of playing favorites among foreign nations.
But now that we've abandoned those principles, we've been stuck in the mud like everyone else.
Now perhaps some might argue that we've gained much more by being a "global leader" and sticking our noses in everyone else's nest around the world. But there is a downside, and this is one of them. Either we can take it hard and point our finger at the Russians saying "you dirty rat." Or we can take it gracefully and say "Okay, you got us this time, but wait 'til next year!"
A lot of that hinges on the degree of interference and influence.
Can anyone actually prove how many US voters were influenced by the Russians? That they participated in dirty tricks might be evident, but how much effect did it actually have over the election? Have they done it before? Are there indications that other foreign powers may have influenced US politics, either now or in the past?
These are the questions I would ask, but I don't see that there are any clear-cut, provable answers here.
Some of it also is rooted in our political culture, particularly the notion that once a man is elected president, it's the duty of Americans to get behind him and support him. I'm not saying that I agree with that, but it's likely a factor in how people relate to him. Not as a matter of blind faith, though. We can still disagree with and criticize the president. We can even lampoon the president.
But there's a fine line we're dealing with here, lest we tear down the mystique surrounding the Office of the President and the Presidency itself. That would make it even more difficult for any future presidents.
Honestly, I just don't see Putin as having that much power. It's all he can do to try to maintain order and stability in his own country, which is still in pretty rough shape. Sure, they'll try to work for their own interests in whatever political arena they're dealing with - just as any other country would do. No world government is ever really innocent in that regard.
As for our democratic process and the internal problems within America, then yes, I will blame that on those who hold the most power within America - the American ruling class. Putin does not rule America, despite whatever sneaky stuff may have happened. If things are currently screwed up here in America, then I'm still going to look to Americans to blame. If we want to protect ourselves from foreign influence, then the solution should be pretty easy and obvious. If we're not willing to do what is necessary to protect America and our democratic process, then wouldn't that be our fault?
esmith
Veteran Member
I did, and I see nothing that clears your assertion that the CIA did not spy on the Senate.
Also Brennan was nominated by Obama, and I'm sure that the White House would defend him as they did at the end of the article.
Then why is anyone complaining? They wanted Trump to get tough on the Russians, and now he is. What's the problem?
Trump ran on a platform of wanting to "Make America Great Again." Does that mean that those who oppose him don't want America to be great? Do they want to see the country down the tubes?
Do you think Brennan was talking about FB? Its you making it about Facebook to deflect all the mass scale of Russians intrusion.
Trump and followers are the ones that keep whining about a much needed investigation.
People who made the anti-establishment vote got their wish at the expense of putting a dictator in office who didn't drain the swamp.
The allegations are specific and the evidence has been provided.
There’s the NSA, CIA, and FBI report.
There’s the special counsel’s indictments.
There’s a difference between foreign individuals and a campaign waged by a foreign government.
There’s also a difference in scale between individuals and a concerted government-run effort.
The specificity is there if you’ve cared to look.
As far as inconsistency, please demonstrate it. That’s part of what makes this such an unassailable fact: that every one of our intelligence agencies is saying the same thing. Not to mention, the independent special counsel investigation and corroborating evidence by our allies.
You misundstand: Their motivations are certainly a worthy avenue of interest.
However, we are unable to do so when there’s still people, like yourself, unconvinced that anything actually happened. That’s the first step.
I am sharing my speculation as to their motives, just like you are.
That’s who I’m talking about. I have no anger towards Russians as individuals.
You seem to be under the impression that punshing the Russian government For meddling in our election somehow means we must be enemies forever. We need to demonstrate that what they did was wrong to deter such future action. This doesn’t need to be a permanent estrangement nor does it need to be all-encompassing.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
But my point is that Russia is very much trying to influence that "intrigue" there but also here, so we shouldn't be taking this lightly.
Which is why Mueller's investigation is so very important.
That's not the point-- the real point is what Russia has tried to do here and in Europe.
The intelligence community is also telling us that there's plenty of evidence that the Russians are continuing what they were doing here and in Europe, and yet Trump & Co. have done almost nothing in prevention of what happened two years ago.
Why do you think that is? Why is it Trump won't denounce Putin and yet denounces western leaders that are our allies? Why was it that it took so long for him to impose the sanctions that he had signed into law? Doesn't that at all make you even a wee bit suspicious?
Experts tell us he has the following of an estimated 80% or so of the Russian electorate, plus the Europeans definitely consider him to be a threat. If you question that, ask the Ukrainians what they think.
The general rule of thumb is "Never underestimate your enemy", and Putin is very much taking actions that make him as such. For us to just sit around and play with our navel, which is what Trump has largely done with this, is literally dangerous, and Brennan was right to call Trump out on this.
It's also in the rhetoric. Rhetoric can be harmful and lead to escalation if we're not careful in how we express ourselves.
The sanctions aren't just over the elections. There are also concerns over Russian involvement in Syria, as well as the Crimea, Ukraine, Georgia. Our butting in to matters involving former Soviet territory might be making them nervous, which could lead us one step closer to war. We need to back off.
As for what we allow in this country, our sense of openness and allowing other countries access to the internet and US media, this is one of the risks we take. Either we can shut the door, or we can just be more careful next time.
But I don't think that sanctions by itself will do all that much to prevent this from happening again. As I said earlier, anyone with a bag full of money can influence our elections and secretly undermine our democracy. That's what we've been "allowing" for a long time from the private sector, so why should it be any great surprise if a foreign government tries to do the same thing?
You may opine that it's "ridiculous," but what are we really seeing here? It's not really xenophobia anyway. That's just the charge that gets bandied about. What's really going on is that there are some nations and cultures which some people consider their favorites, while others they regard as devious and evil. Politics in America seems to revolve around which foreign power is favored by a given candidate or faction. Foreign policy has always been one of the primary issues in political campaigns, whereas America's actual needs seem to be neglected.
It almost appears as if the political factions aren't really even for America anymore. They're for other nations, making it seem as if the whole system has been bought and sold by foreign elements for a long time now. So, Trump may have been bought or co-opted by the Russians, but who bought all the other politicians? Britain? France? Japan? Saudi Arabia? Israel? China? Among other things, American politics has ostensibly become a battleground of multiple foreign factions, while the average American has been losing out big time.
So, when I hear people lament today about the wiles of foreign influence, it comes off as laughable and asinine considering all that we've done over the past century. And as far as foreign powers go, I don't really see the Russians as being devils with horns. There are other countries with influence in America which are far worse and probably a greater threat. The Russians are motivated by wanting to protect themselves, while other countries which are buying up American property left and right have much more aggressive intentions. Countries which dump their goods on American markets and allow cheap labor outsourcing are a greater threat to American security than the Russians. Why should we allow that? Why should we listen to those who continue to advocate for such policies while they're concurrently screaming and howling about supposed "foreign influence"?
A lot of legalese and government doublespeak. I was hoping you'd outline it in your words.
Ultimately, all they have is the Russians posted stuff on the internet and (possibly) did some computer hacking. They're not absolutely certain but they're "pretty sure."
It could also just be certain groups or individuals within a government, but not necessarily representative of the entire government or nation.
Much of your line of argumentation has emphasized the term "foreign government," as you put it in big bold letters above. If it's a domestic issue with our media or something done by our own government, that would ostensibly be viewed differently. But the fact that something "foreign" has done something to "us," that's the prime issue at hand in this.
I have looked, and I stand by my point. That is, unless you want to argue the case further using your own words, rather than just supplying links I've already looked at.
Evidence of what, though? That the Russians posted stuff on the internet? That they exercised their option to utilize freedom of speech in this country? That they "used social media" and had "troll farms"? Is that supposed to impress me as something truly insidious?
Oh, I'm convinced that something happened, but I'm just not as geared towards such an intensity of reaction as some people are. I'm also not clear on what, exactly, we can do to the Russians to punish them for this, other than impose sanctions and escalate the rhetoric, but that may have greater consequences. Right now, my view is that we should work on shoring up our own weaknesses so that no one can do this again.
In order to do that, we would need to convince people, like yourself, that going on and on with this "oh you dirty Russians" routine is counterproductive. We need to look inward and solve our internal problems on our own, not bring in the Russians or other foreign powers into the mix.
Well, I don't think your speculation is correct, based on what I know about Russian history and their perceptions of the outside world. I'm not saying that makes them into a bunch of choir boys, but I don't think they've ever been as aggressive as many people make them out to be.
Very well, but we have to move past this at some point. There's a point where we have to cut our losses and try to do better next time.
For example, we have the mid-term elections coming up soon. How do we convince Americans to not be fooled by trolls on social media? How do we make it so people aren't influenced by foreign meddlers in our electoral process?
Stanyon
WWMRD?
It's not just the implausible findings of our government agencies I find questionable, the blame Russia mantra has been going on in Europe for quite some time before our own.
for example:
Russia was blamed for the outcome of the Brexit vote in the U.K.
Russia was blamed for financing the so called far-right (any Euroskeptic political party) in Europe instead of coming to grips with the fact that some people may have had enough of the E.U. And disagree with it. Marine Le Pen, ( a centrist painted as far right by political enemies) borrowed money from a Russian linked bank but it was only because. Banks in Europe refused to loan the FN or any of it's officers money, in essence attempting to stifle democracy by refusing to fund political parties they don't agree with.
. Russia meddling was Blamed a year before in Germany just in case Merkel didn't win, and they still blamed them not because she lost but because she didn't get as many votes as they thought she should have. Funny thing is they did an investigation and found zero evidence of Russian involvement but did find another culprit-and that was far-rightists in the United States.
. I don't trust our E.U.allies or their intelligence services any further than I can throw them and I suspect this ongoing U.S. smear against Russia has very much to do with justifying our continuing presence in Syria.
You still haven't answered my questions of you.
Buddha Dharma
Dharma Practitioner
Sadly, it does appear to be something like one. I'd say political cult or political messiahism. I tell ya- Americans can sure pick em. Trump has gotta be the biggest clown on history's list of demagogues. He definitely fits with Hitler and Mussolini. His rhetoric and playing to fear is the same, but he's a bozo.
Shad
Veteran Member
How did you calculate your “less than a percent” there?
Based on numerous articles that were in the news covering it.
You have no evidence that anyone was influenced to vote or switch their vote.
It is becoming one
The DNC isn't part of government. Heck the Dems hired IT experts that stole their own data then tried to flee the country. All this points out is the DNC is incompetent when it comes to their data and what they put into their servers. Sounds like a problem for the DNC...
I guess you have never heard of Russia Today?
That is the problem of the States which shows the weakness of those States security. The Fed can not do anything about that without the States' approval.
They attacked both candidates or did you forget that?
Calling it a grave threat is the very hysterical reactions I am arguing against.
What did you want them to do? Announce themselves? Or should Russia meddle in elections openly like Obama did?
No I disagree with how much this increase is actually a threat.
I said Russia spying on America is decades old. Russia using infiltration is decades old. Russia getting data from American sources is decades old. It is just easier with the internet and how much networking is within government databases. Do note that Russia went for weak and soft targets; States and DNC not the Fed.
Easy. I think the threat is overblown.
Which was in reference to FB trolls. FB trolls are threat to democracy? Meanwhile FB enables someone to gain data on 50 million people....
Which again is less than a percent of all the campaign rhetoric flying back and forth between candidates, campaign organizations and supporters.
You think my dismissal of a hysterical reaction means I am not troubled. You are failing to consider there can be a spectrum of reactions. I am not racketing it up to 11 merely because Trump's name is attached to the issue.
I said only the first part not the second.