Tucker interviews Vivek
-
@Horace said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
@Renauda said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
His take on the Russia Ukraine war is just plain wrong. Clueless.
His views on that war all seem based on the notion that the US has little self-interest in the conflict.
I’d like to see him own it then, in all its implications. Don’t just say “we don’t have an interest in Ukraine”, say “I don’t mind if Russia rebuilds its empire”.
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 11:46 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
I’d like to see him own it then, in all its implications. Don’t just say “we don’t have an interest in Ukraine”, say “I don’t mind if Russia rebuilds its empire”.
Well-put.
-
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 13:15 last edited by
He doesn't really talk like he'd just let Russia roll wherever it pleases. He starts talking about it at 30:00.
Link to video -
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 15:24 last edited by Renauda
Listened to him from 30:00 until the yak about populism started. He proposes an armistice along the lines of Korea but takes NATO off the table as means of enforcing or guaranteeing the peace. He also has some naive notions about Russia agreeing to stop meddling in third countries and withdrawing nuclear weapons from the Kaliningrad enclave. I won’t even bother to comment on his thoughts about Sino-Russian relations and Taiwan.
He really needs to be briefed on the reality of the world beyond his corporate offices let alone the borders the USA.
-
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 15:47 last edited by
A "light weight," then.
-
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 16:10 last edited by
-
Listened to him from 30:00 until the yak about populism started. He proposes an armistice along the lines of Korea but takes NATO off the table as means of enforcing or guaranteeing the peace. He also has some naive notions about Russia agreeing to stop meddling in third countries and withdrawing nuclear weapons from the Kaliningrad enclave. I won’t even bother to comment on his thoughts about Sino-Russian relations and Taiwan.
He really needs to be briefed on the reality of the world beyond his corporate offices let alone the borders the USA.
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 16:23 last edited by@Renauda said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
Listened to him from 30:00 until the yak about populism started. He proposes an armistice along the lines of Korea but takes NATO off the table as means of enforcing or guaranteeing the peace. He also has some naive notions about Russia agreeing to stop meddling in third countries and withdrawing nuclear weapons from the Kaliningrad enclave. I won’t even bother to comment on his thoughts about Sino-Russian relations and Taiwan.
He really needs to be briefed on the reality of the world beyond his corporate offices let alone the borders the USA.
That is enough for me to reject him.
-
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 16:40 last edited by
A bit of a lack of long term thinking, or not thinking along the decision tree of all the consequences. It is then that it is realized that the original idea was maybe not the correct one.
-
@jon-nyc said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
I’d like to see him own it then, in all its implications. Don’t just say “we don’t have an interest in Ukraine”, say “I don’t mind if Russia rebuilds its empire”.
Well-put.
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 16:51 last edited by@George-K said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
@jon-nyc said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
I’d like to see him own it then, in all its implications. Don’t just say “we don’t have an interest in Ukraine”, say “I don’t mind if Russia rebuilds its empire”.
Well-put.
Yes. And it's not just Russia and China. We need to build a world where the international costs of aggression far outweigh the potential rewards.
-
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 17:02 last edited by Horace
If Vivek is convinced any of that is in America's best interest, then he'd be in favor. Maybe he's just too dumb to see consequences, as TG guesses, or maybe he's not educated enough on the issues yet. In that same interview, he makes it clear that he's likely to change his mind on some things, if new information or further reflection indicates he should do so. I'm not going to hold him to a series of litmus tests about whether he's supportable as a candidate. That way lies a list of zero supportable candidates. Except maybe for career politicians who know to avoid saying things that fail litmus tests. And end up saying nothing at all.
-
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 17:31 last edited by Mik
No, in most cases I would not either. That said, a president's most important job is foreign policy. Sovereignty is a pretty important part of that, and the world needs the US to help lead the way there. If he indeed believes that rewarding Russian aggression does not harm US interests, that is a killer for me.
-
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 17:44 last edited by Renauda
Ramaswamy strikes me as a person who might be suited for an appointment along the lines of Secretary of Industry. I think with his technocratic background he could do well as such. I do not however see him to be suitable as POTUS or a role that calls for statesmanship and diplomacy.
-
No, in most cases I would not either. That said, a president's most important job is foreign policy. Sovereignty is a pretty important part of that, and the world needs the US to help lead the way there. If he indeed believes that rewarding Russian aggression does not harm US interests, that is a killer for me.
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 18:05 last edited by@Mik said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
No, in most cases I would not either. That said, a president's most important job is foreign policy. Sovereignty is a pretty important part of that, and the world needs the US to help lead the way there. If he indeed believes that rewarding Russian aggression does not harm US interests, that is a killer for me.
He does seem to be primarily concerned with domestic issues, and has firm opinions on those. The Presidency is really a different ball of fish when it comes to strategy, particularly if things start to go south internationally.
-
wrote on 19 Aug 2023, 18:10 last edited by
He speaks well and is engaging. His worldview is a bit on the naive side, however - I got the feeling that we'll just "trust" Russia to behave. We're already "trusting" Iran and other countries and I'm skeptical of how that'll work out in the long run.
-
wrote on 20 Aug 2023, 01:47 last edited by
Chris Christie's contrast:
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Saturday drew a stark foreign policy contrast with rivals for the GOP nomination who have proposed loosening current American commitments in Ukraine and Taiwan in the face of aggression from Russia and China.
-
wrote on 20 Aug 2023, 01:52 last edited by
From the little I know, it seems that Gov. Christie strategy to be everything the others aren't, and make himself pretty unique among the candidates. It may work. Who knows?
-
wrote on 20 Aug 2023, 02:33 last edited by kluurs
He's very well educated and well-read - and that comes through his books. I find him interesting as he challenges established views - for both parties though obviously he cudgels the left more than the right. He and Art Chang present some interesting, fresh ideas which help discussion - as compared to the reps that are reading off the flash cards what is the party line.
-
wrote on 22 Aug 2023, 14:27 last edited by
I dont think that Mr. Ramaswamy is dumb, but I do think he lacks a long term vision (or understanding) of consequences to his ideas on foreign policy. Ukraine, Taiwan, and now Isreal.
During an interview this weekend on Russell Brand's Rumble show, Ramaswamy said he would end funding to Israel when a $38 billion package ends in 2028.
"Come 2028, that additional aid won’t be necessary in order to still have the kind of stability that we’d actually have in the Middle East by having Israel more integrated in with its partners," Ramaswamy said.
I think his star is buring out in this campaign cycle.
-
wrote on 22 Aug 2023, 14:39 last edited by Horace
I think his life has been characterized by extraordinarily consistent success, and his ego has never been checked by the failed ambitions that shape most people. As for his foreign policy ideas, obviously they are outside the overton window, but I don't claim to understand foreign policy and its effects any better than the next person. I enjoy his discussions on the topic, and I don't mistake flippant dismissals for well-considered rebuttals.
-
wrote on 22 Aug 2023, 16:05 last edited by
He has a shit-eating grin lol.
-
He has a shit-eating grin lol.
wrote on 22 Aug 2023, 16:55 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in Tucker interviews Vivek:
He has a shit-eating grin lol.
Tucker or Vivek?
Ah...never mind.