So I know we're not supposed to talk politics - Presidential Election - Poll

Put your head in the sand and join Syria (who were busy slaughtering 450,000 of their population) and Nicaragua (who wanted more change). I guess total global consensus, including our defense department (full of liberals), isn't enough. Tillerson former head of Exxon which pioneered climate change studies is for staying on.

 

Again, "global consensus" means nothing if the reasoning behind said consensus is weak. Also, it is easy to have "consensus" on something like this considering the accord itself is pretty fruitless in terms of its enforcement mechanisms. The Chinese get a free ride essentially for fifteen years and then will consider whether to really engage in climate cutting. Thus I think they're being against the U.S. leaving is thus a total joke, especially considering how they pollute their own environment (which is extreme). The other countries can join up to make themselves more accepted globally perhaps, but again when push comes to shove, there's no real way to force them to meet their targets. As for our defense department, it got more politicized than it should be during the Obama years. Tillerson's opinion is his opinion.

 

Deals like this take authority away from the American people and subject them to global institutions filled with unelected bureaucrats. They also give legal muscle to environmentalists looking to sue over any rollbacks in climate regulations.

Carlson is raising his game to Hannity. 3 monkey level. Carlson says you will defend anything to the latest homeless person they dragged in to offer a counter.

Carlson is raising his game to Hannity. 3 monkey level. Carlson says you will defend anything to the latest homeless person they dragged in to offer a counter.

 

Just explaining my opinion in some detail, as you seem very enamored with "global consensus" and I wanted to outline why I am not.

Any deal that can get 193 of 195 countries on board will be horribly flawed. That said it is a step in the right direction. For us that can and have procreated, it's kinda important.

.

The left is excited about Comey speaking. I'm excited about this. Susan rice subpoenaed

https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcnews.com/...ma-trio-n766861

Put your head in the sand and join Syria (who were too busy slaughtering 450,000 of their population) and Nicaragua (who wanted more change). I guess total global consensus, including our defense department (which is not a surrogate for MSNBC), isn't enough. Tillerson former head of Exxon which pioneered climate change studies is for staying on.

 

How effective the Paris agreement will be, who knows. The US walking away from it, destroys it.

 

So 192 of 195 countries are unable to do this if one pulls out. LOL! Sounds like China or Merkel need to step up, considering we are assholes and they don't need us an all...

 

Rather then whining about us leaving they should sieze this opportunity to enhance their vision of a global economy. You should be happy!!!

So 192 of 195 countries are unable to do this if one pulls out. LOL! Sounds like China or Merkel need to step up, considering we are assholes and they don't need us an all...

 

Rather then whining about us leaving they should sieze this opportunity to enhance their vision of a global economy. You should be happy!!!

 

Well if Trump pulls out, you may get exactly that, China and the EU are moving ahead and strengthening ties. US is abdicating its leadership role which I am sure a lot of you prefer. Not sure Trump will be able to negotiate "great deals" from a position of weakness.

 

Reducing pollution is a little harder when that one country is the second biggest polluter on the planet.

 

The Paris agreement is not perfect by a long shot, but you are on the wrong side of history when a company like Exxon Mobil is for the agreement. Again Trump is only interested in pandering to his base.

 

Surprised Trump didn't schedule the announcement in prime time for maximum ratings to deflect attention from all the other messes he is dealing with.

 

An alternate theory is he will stay in and reduce US goals unilaterally claiming a successful renegotiation.

"Absorb the corsts".

Playing to his base once again. Pence and Pruitt, could they brown nose more?

What good can this provide our country?

Any deal that can get 193 of 195 countries on board will be horribly flawed. That said it is a step in the right direction. For us that can and have procreated, it's kinda important.

 

While I know you are being sarcastic, the reality is that yes such a deal can be very flawed. One of the reasons so many countries got on board is because lots of them have special waivers and also there is no real enforcement mechanism. There is also a requirement that the United States is supposed to provide aid to the poorer countries. So yeah, it will attract a lot of countries.

 

Well if Trump pulls out, you may get exactly that, China and the EU are moving ahead and strengthening ties. US is abdicating its leadership role which I am sure a lot of you prefer. Not sure Trump will be able to negotiate "great deals" from a position of weakness.

 

It's not a position of weakness. He will be negotiating from a position of strength. Strength in the real world is not based on whether the other countries like you or not, it is grounded in how strong your economy is and how strong your military is. And the Europeans will continue to do business with the United States due to our military, political, and economic influence, the size of our market, and the fact that in the end, money talks.

 

Reducing pollution is a little harder when that one country is the second biggest polluter on the planet.

 

The Paris agreement is not perfect by a long shot, but you are on the wrong side of history when a company like Exxon Mobil is for the agreement. Again Trump is only interested in pandering to his base.

 

The Chinese, the #1 polluter, get a free ride for fifteen years with this accord, yet we are to be lectured to as a nation about reducing pollution? As for Exxon-Mobil, two things:

 

1) There is no such thing as the "wrong side of history." History is history.

 

2) Exxon-Mobil's support of the deal would have to mean that they stand to profit from it, because these giant companies virtually never support any kind of such policy when it could hurt them. It's like the light bulb companies supporting increased energy-efficiency when it requires you to buy their more expensive appliances and light bulbs, Wal-Mart supporting a higher minimum wage when it will hurt a whole lot of their smaller business competition, or Enron supporting the Kyoto Treaty when they wanted to make their main business the trading of carbon credits. I do not know what it is right now, but I would bet you that there is some aspect of this deal that Exxon stands to profit from.

Thank God we pulled out in time (when in doubt- always Pull Out in time)

Truer words have never been spoken.................

193 of 195 countries signed it. That's 99%. Looks like all the kids decided this was a good idea....

 

This doesn't quite make the point I think you think it does...

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/06...celerating.html

This doesn't quite make the point I think you think it does...

 

At least he had the balls to do it at home in front of his sycophants, rather than last week at the G7. Trust me the rest of the world is listening.

Well if Trump pulls out, from a position of weakness.

 

This is what happens when trump doesn't pull out...

What good can this provide our country?

 

 

None. This is one of those "feel-good" PR legislation stunts that has no real teeth to it. It's more for show than anything else. There's no upside for the US so it makes sense that we pulled out.

Trust me the rest of the world is listening.

 

It's about time they listen ..and listen good. No more lip service like the last 16 yrs or so.

 

Lady Liberty is no longer the world's bitch

 

So I don't know much about the Paris accord but I don't understand pursuing coal. Maybe the two items are not intertwined? I apologize I'm ignorant with this subject. Can someone who knows explain?

What about rewriting the agreement with more favorable terms for the U.S. ? I know they say wont rewrite it, but money of course changes everything..

So I don't know much about the Paris accord but I don't understand pursuing coal. Maybe the two items are not intertwined? I apologize I'm ignorant with this subject. Can someone who knows explain?

 

 

Approximately 65% of USA electricity comes from coal. About 41% worldwide.

 

Think about that for minute.

 

I work in energy and trust me, if you turned off the coal the world would go DARK in short order. I'm all for alternative energy and actually look for ways to improve efficiency in all sectors. Nothing wrong with keeping the lights on while we continue to develop alternatives.. Nuke, Nat Gas, Propane,Oil,and Solar combined can NOT keep the lights on.

What about rewriting the agreement with more favorable terms for the U.S. ? I know they say wont rewrite it, but money of course changes everything..

 

 

I'd give him mad props if he can. That would be pretty damn impressive. But nothing, literally nothing that he has done up to this point indicates he can.