Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-21-2020, 09:55 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,038

Trump withdrawing from another major treaty


this makes no sense like almost everything he says or does

https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...n-skies-treaty
  #2  
Old 05-21-2020, 10:00 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,840
I remember when some on the Dope (and elsewhere) were arguing that Trump was the peace candidate. It was ridiculous then, but it's become utter flat-Earth lunacy now.
  #3  
Old 05-21-2020, 10:03 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,210
Well it makes sense. If we can do whatever we want, because we are America, why would we be party to a treaty that let's others do things?
  #4  
Old 05-21-2020, 10:04 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 18,294
Is it good for Russia? Well, there's your answer!
__________________
ďAll you have to do every day is eat, drink and move forward in some capacity.Ē --Mary Ann Thomas who cycled 6,000 miles solo over six months across the US and Canada.
  #5  
Old 05-21-2020, 11:33 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 19,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
Is it good for Russia? Well, there's your answer!
Looks like it's not good for Russia actually.

The argument is that they're restricting where the overflights can occur in Russia and we're not, which gives them an advantage and is not in good faith or within the spirit of the treaty. So we're pulling out.

I'm not sure what's so bad about it; it's kind of insane to allow the Russians or anyone else free overflight permission when you think about it.
  #6  
Old 05-21-2020, 11:41 AM
Neofio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
Looks like it's not good for Russia actually.

The argument is that they're restricting where the overflights can occur in Russia and we're not, which gives them an advantage and is not in good faith or within the spirit of the treaty. So we're pulling out.

I'm not sure what's so bad about it; it's kind of insane to allow the Russians or anyone else free overflight permission when you think about it.
As I understand it, it allows the Russians to overfly any and all US military bases in Europe (and Turkey for the Middle East) given that those countries are members of open skies. Its *very* bad for the US, if only because the US has the most overseas military bases stationed around the world.

Last edited by Neofio; 05-21-2020 at 11:46 AM.
  #7  
Old 05-21-2020, 12:14 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,038
they claim it's no longer needed since satellites are so good at taking pictures now. And that Russia was not following the treaty anyway.
  #8  
Old 05-21-2020, 12:22 PM
Blank Slate's Avatar
Blank Slate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 5,737
Trump really shouldn't be making any major changes during the last few months of his presidency. It will become yet another piece of half-assed, unfinished business that Biden and his team will have to clean up.
__________________
Flush the Turd 2020
  #9  
Old 05-21-2020, 12:28 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,225
It's bad because it discourages military transparency. I wonder which country or countries would benefit from that.
  #10  
Old 05-21-2020, 12:33 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 86,197
"Open Skies" was never a Russian initiative. It was an idea that the United States pushed for and spent decades getting the Russians to agree to.

The idea was first proposed by Dwight Eisenhower. The Soviet government rejected the idea.

It finally became a treaty under George H.W. Bush. Who was the former head of the CIA.

Are we supposed to believe that Donald Trump saw flaws in the military and intelligence arguments that Eisenhower and Bush missed?
  #11  
Old 05-21-2020, 12:40 PM
John Bredin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: BuffaloGrove IL (Chicago)
Posts: 2,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Are we supposed to believe that Donald Trump saw flaws in the military and intelligence arguments that Eisenhower and Bush missed?
Trump thinks feels he sees flaws looking through the lens of his limited zero-sum no-such-thing-as-win-win view of international relations, business, politics, and life generally. In other words, par for the course.
  #12  
Old 05-21-2020, 12:42 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blank Slate View Post
Trump really shouldn't be making any major changes during the last few months of his presidency. It will become yet another piece of half-assed, unfinished business that Biden and his team will have to clean up.
Thatís a feature, not a bug. In their eyes, probably the best feature of all.
  #13  
Old 05-21-2020, 02:56 PM
Dark Sponge's Avatar
Dark Sponge is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 135
Trump has made some huge mistakes but I'm not sure this is one of them. If Russia was breaking the treaty why should we allow them to do fly overs? Also, in game theory terms, Tit for Tat is a viable strategy here. Not "punishing" the other side for breaking promises can make the relationship between countries even worse.
  #14  
Old 05-22-2020, 09:44 AM
Gukumatz is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 2,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Sponge View Post
Trump has made some huge mistakes but I'm not sure this is one of them. If Russia was breaking the treaty why should we allow them to do fly overs? Also, in game theory terms, Tit for Tat is a viable strategy here. Not "punishing" the other side for breaking promises can make the relationship between countries even worse.
Russia was not "breaking" the treaty, but it was being intransigent and difficult. I agree on that, but the treaty had definite value because it let us narrow down areas in which Moscow had ongoing operational security concerns, like Czechnya, Abkhasia, and South-Ossetia. Those are the areas where Russia made it difficult to do flyovers and these are the areas the west would want to put in supplementary (satellite) surveillance.

Thankfully, Russia is not replying with withdrawing from the treaty. Tit-for-tat is conflict escalation and we - Europeans at least - don't want that with Russia. If we lost that ability to do flyovers, we'd have to resort to riskier espionage to figure out where their troops were, what they were doing. Now we can look in on them and see what they're doing, they can look in on us and see what we're doing and as long as nobody's suddenly bunkering up, hoarding supplies or conducting en-masse maneouvers, we know that things are probably fine.
  #15  
Old 05-22-2020, 01:17 PM
Dark Sponge's Avatar
Dark Sponge is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gukumatz View Post
...Tit-for-tat is conflict escalation and we - Europeans at least - don't want that with Russia. If we lost that ability to do flyovers, we'd have to resort to riskier espionage to figure out where their troops were, what they were doing. Now we can look in on them and see what they're doing, they can look in on us and see what we're doing and as long as nobody's suddenly bunkering up, hoarding supplies or conducting en-masse maneouvers, we know that things are probably fine.
I disagree that Tit for Tat (both in game theory terms and here) is conflict escalation. In game theory, TFT begins with a trusting stance and assumes the best. It only turns negative after receiving a betrayal (negative response). It then forgives and returns positive as soon as it receives a positive response.

In this case both sides are trying to act in their own best interests. If breaking treaty terms have no negative consequences it is in Russia's best interest to keep breaking treaties. A negative reaction may cause Russia to think twice before breaking other treaties and actually reduce the chance of war.

Not reacting to broken treaties delayed the (then future) Allies' response to Germany in the late 1930s.

Last edited by Dark Sponge; 05-22-2020 at 01:19 PM.
  #16  
Old 05-22-2020, 01:25 PM
Lance Turbo is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,774
No one is suggesting that we should have just let Russia violate the terms of treaty with no consequences.

Responding to them violating the terms of the treaty by giving them something that want is what Trump is doing here. There is no game theoretical way to polish this turd.

Russia was doing something we didn't like. Trump responded by giving them something that they wanted.
  #17  
Old 05-22-2020, 01:40 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 19,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
No one is suggesting that we should have just let Russia violate the terms of treaty with no consequences.

Responding to them violating the terms of the treaty by giving them something that want is what Trump is doing here. There is no game theoretical way to polish this turd.

Russia was doing something we didn't like. Trump responded by giving them something that they wanted.
So how exactly do we get them to quit doing what we don't like without giving them something they want? The status quo sucks- they get what they want in all ways- unhindered overflights of our stuff, and the ability to prohibit our overflights.
  #18  
Old 05-22-2020, 01:48 PM
Lance Turbo is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,774
Diplomacy. Is that a real question.

They were restricting some of our flights, so in retaliation Trump is giving them the right to restrict all our flights.

This is a dumb move.
  #19  
Old 05-22-2020, 03:58 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 86,197
Russia was unhappy with the treaty so we tear it up. Boy, that'll show those Russians.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Bredin View Post
Trump thinks feels he sees flaws looking through the lens of his limited zero-sum no-such-thing-as-win-win view of international relations, business, politics, and life generally. In other words, par for the course.
Yes, Trump does think he's smarter than everyone else. But the reality is he doesn't know much of what's going on. I doubt he knew this treaty existed a month ago. Somebody must have put the idea in his head that it was bad.

I'd like to know who that person is and have his financial records investigated. See if there are any unaccounted for rubles.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017