Zakaj USA niso (več) najboljša država na svetu

Pac_Man

⋆Распут&
10. maj 2014
2.211
0
36
Obama je po katastrofalni prejšnji administraciji popravil ugled ZDA in kljub mnogo polenom pod noge zagotovil pogoje za okrevanje gospodarstva, ampak na žalost je zunanjepolitično ena velika megla. Še posebej v tem mandatu, ko ima resor čez še bolj megleni Kerry. Ironično mu je tudi v naprej dobljena nobelova za mir precej zvezala roke in omogočila širjenje illiberalizma.

Naj že pride 20. januar.
cheer.gif


http://observer.com/2016/10/putins-activation-of-iskander-m-ballistic-missile-is-a-message-to-obama/

Citat:
Putin’s Activation of ‘Iskander-M’ Ballistic Missile Is a Message to Obama

The KGB officer in the Kremlin seeks one last, grand strategic humiliation for our president before he leaves office


It’s long been obvious that Vladimir Putin and his inner circle view Barack Obama with utter contempt. To the hard men in Moscow, who got their schooling in the KGB, our diffident, wordy Ivy League lawyer president is a weakling—almost a caricature of everything they despise about the postmodern West.

...

It’s therefore no surprise that Russians view Obama with contempt—and so does their leader. As our president winds up his second term and prepares to move out of the White House, the Kremlin simply isn’t bothering to hide that contempt any longer, even in high-level diplomacy, where a modicum of tact is expected.

...

This has now descended into farce, with Russia’s foreign ministry tweeting mocking insults at America’s top diplomat. Like the infamous honey badger, the Kremlin simply doesn’t care one whit what we think. We can at least count our blessings that Secretary Kerry hasn’t dispatched James Taylor to Moscow.

...

This has become deeply embarrassing as the Syrian nightmare has descended into war crimes and even genocide on a truly horrifying scale. For an administration that prided itself on its alleged humanitarianism, this is an appalling ending which the world will not soon forget. The Russians, of course, have acted like Russians, bombing and shelling haphazardly, adding impressively to the death toll among Syrian civilians. This, too, was easily foreseeable by anyone who witnessed what happened to Chechnya. Moscow does not believe in tears, as they say.

...

Just in case anybody in the Pentagon missed that unsubtle move, Russia’s defense ministry this week bluntly stated that any effort by American airpower to change “facts on the ground” in Syria will be countered with live fire.(...)

This was all predictable. Ever an opportunist, Putin is simply running the table in the waning months of Obama’s presidency. The Kremlin may never see an American president this weak-willed again, so the Russians are making the most of this undeserved geostrategic gift while they still can. Signs of this aggressive opportunism are everywhere.

...

Obama has gone to great lengths to deny that we’re in Cold War 2.0, as I explained after Moscow’s annexation of Crimea, but Putin isn’t playing along with that script. (...)

Much of this is just for show, hardly more than chest-thumping by Moscow. (...)

That said, some of the Kremlin’s current military moves are deeply alarming and indicate a risk-taking mood in Russia’s leadership that ought to seriously worry NATO and the Pentagon.(...)

Overflights of Finland and Estonia (...) by Russian aircraft have become almost routine, an on-going demonstration of Kremlin honeybadgerness. But those aerial cat-and-mouse games are customarily done by slow, unarmed Russian planes, just to send a message to the Finns and Estonians to not get any ideas about disobeying Moscow.

This week, however, Putin upped the ante by sending armed fighter jets to intimidate Helsinki and Tallinn. Yesterday, two Su-27 fighters of the Russian air force, called Flankers by NATO, overflew Finland. Their incursions were brief but, significantly, the Flankers were armed for combat.

Then, early this morning, another Flanker violated Estonian airspace—fully armed and with its transponder turned off. (...)If the Russians keep sending armed jets over Estonia, the odds of a confrontation with NATO fighters rise dramatically.

Today’s biggest news, however, comes from Estonian reports that the Russian military is sending Iskander-M missiles to Kaliningrad on a civilian freighter. It’s expected to dock in Kaliningrad today with its alarming cargo.

(...)An Iskander-M based in Kaliningrad can strike targets deep in Poland and across the whole Baltic region. Make no mistake, this is primarily an offensive weapons system.

(...)For Warsaw and several other NATO capitals, this move resembles a Baltic version of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

This constitutes a direct challenge to Washington by Moscow—and by Vladimir Putin to Barack Obama, personally. The KGB officer in the Kremlin is seeking to get in one last, grand strategic humiliation for our president before he leaves office. And why not? Such reckless antics have worked well for the Russians so far, given Obama’s preference to avert eyes and hope for the best whenever Moscow misbehaves.

Not to mention that Putin is surely aware that his window of opportunity is closing soon. The campaign of the very Kremlin-friendly Donald Trump is in free-fall, so Moscow will likely have to contend with an angry Hillary Clinton in the White House in a little more than three months. She knows all too well that the Kremlin has pulled out all the stops to hurt her election chances—between spying, hacking, intimidation, and leaks of Democratic emails—and if the Clintons excel at anything it’s personal vendettas. The time for Putin to act, therefore, is now. Get ready, it’s going to be a bumpy autumn.
 
I

Izbrisan uporabnik #9334

Citat:
Uporabnik AndY1 pravi:
US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President_%281940_to_2015%29.png

Ta graf ne pove popolnoma nič. Primerja gospodarjenje obeh aktualnih strank in ta primerjava ne pove ničesar.
V ozadju grafa manjka še krivulja gospodarske rasti in ključni politični zgodovinski dogodki. Potem bi postal graf vsaj malce uporaben
rolleyes-1.gif
.

V obdobju 41 - 46 se je država zakreditirala (seveda pri lastnem gospodarstvu) zaradi financiranja druge svetovne. Po letu 46 potrebe po kreditih ni bilo več, saj je potrošnja zaradi konca globalne krize upadla in se je država financirala iz lastnih presežkov. Industrija je bila takrat na vrhuncu zmogljivosti in je pravzaprav pravkar doživljala krizo zaradi recesije - upad naročil
shocked-1.gif
.

Zanimivo da se kreditiranje države ni dvignilo v obdobju 60 - 75, (Kenedy, Nixon, Ford), ko so šli amerikanci na Luno.
confused-1.gif


Kaj je naredil Reagan 80 leta, da je dvignil dolg? V bistvu je ugašal hladno vojno, ampak to bi kvečjemu zmanjševalo zvezno zadolževanje, kajne. Morda boj z Japonci za tehnološko prevlado? Takrat je amerika dejansko zopet imela krizo zaradi japonske tehnološke okupacije trgov po celem svetu.
Ok, Bush za njim je odprl Zalivsko vojno, od tu verjetno povišanje kreditov.

Potem je bil demokratični Clinton ki je umiril žogico in vmes še Moniko nategnil in to je bilo to. Da se je trend zadolževanja zopet dvignil po 2001 letu, je pa tudi jasno in logično.

Vsekakor v ozadju manjka graf gibanja gospodarske rasti. Ne glede kdo je bil na oblasti, republikanci ali demokrati, ta graf prikazuje zgolj zgodovino državne porabe, pa še tisto zavajajoče, ker ni v ozadju prikazane državne malhe kot amortizerja
rolleyes-1.gif
 

Pac_Man

⋆Распут&
10. maj 2014
2.211
0
36
Največja finančna kriza po 1929? No, to.
 

AndY1

Guru
Osebje foruma
18. sep 2007
22.084
4.080
113
Citat:
Uporabnik Demz pravi:
Vsekakor v ozadju manjka graf gibanja gospodarske rasti. Ne glede kdo je bil na oblasti, republikanci ali demokrati, ta graf prikazuje zgolj zgodovino državne porabe, pa še tisto zavajajoče, ker ni v ozadju prikazane državne malhe kot amortizerja
rolleyes-1.gif

Ta graf predstavlja zadolženost glede na GDP, torej tudi v primerjavi z gospodarsko rastjo.
 
I

Izbrisan uporabnik #9334

Ja, glede na GDP, lahko napišeš tudi po slovensko, BDP, kajne!
grims-1.gif
Ali bi se raje po angleško pogovarjal?

In zopet - kje je v grafu BDP amerike v aktualnem obdobju? (da bo še kdo drug razumel smisel tvojega grafa razen tebe?)
 

AndY1

Guru
Osebje foruma
18. sep 2007
22.084
4.080
113
Ojej, ne kompliciraj, pa si poglej wikipedio, tako kot sem jaz graf pobral s tam.
 

ferdo

Guru
3. sep 2007
10.548
3.896
113
Ljubljana
hmpg.net
Dolg je izražen v % BDP. Kar pomeni:
- če gre dolg gor, vendar rase BDP hitreje, bo šla krivulja DOL
- če gre BDP dol hitrje kot se zmanjšuje dolg, bo šla krivulja GOR.
Krivulja ne kaže abslolutnega gibanja dolga.

1980 - druga naftna kriza (iraško Iranska vojna - začetek recesije v USA)

Je pa ta krivulja zanimiva zato, ker obstaja nekaj teorij (IMF, ECB jih podpirajo) ki pravijo koliko % BDP si lahko zadolžen, da je to vzdržno. Zagotovo ne več kot 100+:)
 
I

Izbrisan uporabnik #9334

Citat:
Uporabnik ferdo pravi:
Dolg je izražen v % BDP. Kar pomeni:
- če gre dolg gor, vendar rase BDP hitreje, bo šla krivulja DOL
- če gre BDP dol hitrje kot se zmanjšuje dolg, bo šla krivulja GOR.
Krivulja ne kaže abslolutnega gibanja dolga.

1980 - druga naftna kriza (iraško Iranska vojna - začetek recesije v USA)

Je pa ta krivulja zanimiva zato, ker obstaja nekaj teorij (IMF, ECB jih podpirajo) ki pravijo koliko % BDP si lahko zadolžen, da je to vzdržno. Zagotovo ne več kot 100+:)

Ja, to bo v redu.

Iraško - Iranska vojna kot začetek recesije v Ameriki? Hmm, mislil sem,da so amerikanci precej samozadostni oz. neodvisni z nafto. Nekako imam bolj v spominu, da so jih tja Japonci poslali (mislim - v recesijo). V drugi polovici 70 let in osemdeseta leta - cel svet se je za glavo držal, kako se boriti proti tehnološko razviti kulturi (Japonska), ki pa ne pozna niti sociale niti sindikatov
rolleyes-1.gif
.
Ameriki je takrat dejansko padel BDP zaradi japonskih tehničnih izdelkov in je po cajtengah dnevno bila prava panika.

Da se pa zadolževanje amerike ni poznalo v 60. letih, ko so šli na Luno, pa še Vietnam so se šli ..., - je pa čudno. Saj so vseskozi kričali, da kako drago je to bilo .
rolleyes-1.gif
 

skala

Majstr
27. feb 2013
10.089
346
83
Kamnje
če va versaæe vojska ni nič sposobna in jih bosonogi sesuvajo. treba malo porinit stvari v demokratično smer...
 

Rsk

Fizikalc
31. maj 2016
151
54
28
http://www.obramba.com/novice/pentagon-bi-rusijo-premagal-v-10-do-20-dneh/
Citat:
“V Pentagonu, kjer zdaj delam, obstajajo izvrstni načrti vojne z vsemi državami na svetu, podrobnejši načrti za vojne pa se razdelajo za nestabilne in agresivne režime. Morebitna vojna z Rusija ne bo izgledala kot vojna z Irakom leta 2003, čeprav ima Rusija približno enako veliko vojsko in raven tehnološkega razvoja. Vendar pa je imel Irak bolj disciplinirano in izkušenejšo vojsko, v njej ni bilo niti kraj niti alkoholizma,” je še zapisal Djurberg.
stupid-1.gif


Samozavest serijsko...
hysterical-1.gif
 

Matey

AlterZavarovalničar
6. sep 2007
33.770
15.829
113
Nepresenetljiv proUSA oz. antiRUS PR. Kar je bolj presenetljivo je to, koliko ljudi dandanes še vedno verjame takšnim pravljicam. Tudi na temu forumu je kar nekaj takih cvetk
aplauz.gif