Trump pulls USA out of Paris climate deal

[Greenmile]

That's the dumbest thing anyone has ever posted on the internet.

Remember Ringo?

[BleedingClaret]

*You're

Yep I'll give you that, I usually proof read my posts, could blame predictive, but it'd be a fib.
That's a genuine error.
I'm actually generally really bad at punctuation, partly cos the last book I read, made it half way through, was Digby the biggest dog in the world, I was 11.
I shall edit it, before you take a picture of it and then deny it, or is there an internet trail.
There was a bigger picture I think.

[BleedingClaret]

What, that if you use a car then you're a hypocrite for wanting to reduce emissions? No, it's not. It's dumb as ****. It's like arguing against someone who says we should reduce government debt by criticising them for not donating their wages to that cause.

Incorrect analogy it's like someone personally borrowing to an unsustainable level and then arguing against the deficit.

[Imploding Turtle]

Incorrect analogy it's like someone personally borrowing to an unsustainable level and then arguing against the deficit.

My analogy was perfectly adequate. You just don't understand it.

[BleedingClaret]

My analogy was perfectly adequate. You just don't understand it.

Surely it wasn't an analogy

[No Ney Never]

My analogy was perfectly adequate. You just don't understand it.

Your analogy is simply another in the list of Imploding Turtle trying to come across as clever but actually exposing himself as trying too hard posts.
Do you drive a carbon emitting petrol or diesel car?

[ClaretAndJew]

BREAKING: France, Germany, Italy issue joint statement saying Paris climate accord can't be renegotiated.

[Greenmile]

Yep I'll give you that, I usually proof read my posts, could blame predictive, but it'd be a fib.
That's a genuine error.
I'm actually generally really bad at punctuation, partly cos the last book I read, made it half way through, was Digby the biggest dog in the world, I was 11.
I shall edit it, before you take a picture of it and then deny it, or is there an internet trail.
There was a bigger picture I think.

It was kind of a joke, given that you were accusing me of acting superior.

Do I really have to explain everything to you? (that's a continuation of the same joke, by the way, as is this).

Also I don't really need to take a picture of your typo because you've admitted to it in the post I've quoted here, and everyone can see that, too. Not that I'd be bothered or capable anyway.

[Spiral]

Read somewhere that Nicaragua only refused to be a signatory because they believed it didn't go far enough, particularly in forcing the very biggest polluters to cut emissions.

[BleedingClaret]

It was kind of a joke, given that you were accusing me of acting superior.

Do I really have to explain everything to you? (that's a continuation of the same joke, by the way, as is this).

Also I don't really need to take a picture of your typo because you've admitted to it in the post I've quoted here, and everyone can see that, too. Not that I'd be bothered or capable anyway.

I hope you haven't edited some bad grandma or summat

[Imploding Turtle]

Your analogy is simply another in the list of Imploding Turtle trying to come across as clever but actually exposing himself as trying too hard posts.
Do you drive a carbon emitting petrol or diesel car?

No, i don't.

[Greenmile]

I hope you haven't edited some bad grandma or summat

I just added in the words "by the way". Not sure why really as they don't add anything to my post, other than a little rhythm perhaps.

[Imploding Turtle]

he's talking about this...

[Imploding Turtle]

[Imploding Turtle]

Just incase any of you think there couldn't possibily be a link between climate change and terrorism

[Sidney1st]

Has Ed Miliband just accused someone else of being a weak leader?

Ok then.

[martin_p]

Has Ed Miliband just accused someone else of being a weak leader?

Ok then.

He has. And the supremely embarrassing thing for 'strong and stable' May is that he's got a point. Yes, that's right, even Ed Milliband is making May look bad. If she does win the election let's hope she manages to shake off her inability to hold an opinion about absolutely anything!

[claretdom]

Being as weak as she is, when she wins should Corbyn resign ?

[martin_p]

Being as weak as she is, when she wins should Corbyn resign ?

Yes. Next question.

[claretdom]

Yes. Next question.

Will he ?

[martin_p]

Will he ?

I think that's something you're better asking him.

[Imploding Turtle]

Will he ?

I hope not. There should be a leadership contest though and the members should decide who leads the party going forward.

[Corky]

I hope that Trumps actions will be negated by, not just the rest of the world, but also people in his own country realising that the Paris accord should continue to be adhered to.

The reason why over the last 20 years employment in the coal mines in Pennsylvania has halved is nothing to do with the Paris accord but simply that there are better things out there. Renewable energy is now a big business and there is a link between countries adopting it and growth in their economy.

Maybe Trump had to make a stand but as we can see by what is being said in Pittsburgh they are going to carry on doing what they are doing.

California as someone mentioned have some very stretching targets which they will continue to try and achieve.

I like that the French President mentioned in his speech that we want to make the world great again. Bit of a nod to the Donald keeping on saying; make America great again.

[Hipper]

I listened to his speech and it didn't seem well co-ordinated with lots of repetition. The main point seemed to be that the US would have to pay 'billions' to less developed countries like India whilst they were allowed to build more coal fired power stations.

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/05/trump-paris-agreement/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why therefore (Trump continued) should the US not build it's own coal power stations creating US jobs? Coal seemed to be a big part of his speech.

I find it difficult to find unbiased information about coal power stations as the industry is promoting Carbon Capture Storage (CCS) and Highly Efficient Low Emission (HELE) as the miracle solution:

https://www.worldcoal.org/sites/default ... tsheet.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.worldcoal.org/news-opinion/ccs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some argue that from a coal point of view the US would be better off remaining in the Paris Agreement so that they can steer decisions on coal.

What Trump did say is that he was willing to discuss a new agreement of some sort that he felt did not penalise the US.

[KateR]

he wants a better deal for the USA. He has realized that leaving provides more bargaining power for the next steps, he has not exactly told everyone in the USA to go polluting because it does not matter.

We left the EU for similar reasons however it was the people who forced our revered leader in to that one because he was not strong enough to make the decision by himself/plus did not believe it would strengthen Britain, the people made the decision he paid for it and someone else will lead our exit.

The art of the deal and negotiating is to be in a strong position for what you want, Trump has played his card and the rest now must deal with it, he is doing similar with NATO As an elected Leader he is doing what he and millions believe is better for the USA rather than being told you are the biggest therefore you pay the most.

Whether you like him or not he is doing what is best for his country, I would like to see a British Leader doing the same.

Lot of knee jerk comments on here from people jumping on the soundbyte wagon and the Trump haters band wagon, with very little original thought. But I did like the comment regarding what people are personally doing to lower the climate situation if you truly believe in it, when you have electric cars and heat your houses with solar power/heat pumps then I can see a valid reason to be critical of this action but little else!

All of course just my own personal opinion

[fatboy47]

It's a pity Trump senior didn't pull out.

[Imploding Turtle]

KateR, no matter how this is dressed up America has reneged on the deal it made with the rest of the world. There is no "better deal" to be made. You're not going to negotiate with the planet to ask it to be less affected by CO2. And what evidence is there that what he's doing is best for his country? It might be best for the oil companies but who else and how?

[bobinho]

Dunno how much truth there is in this, but I heard a statement on the radio this morning that suggested the US would contribute 0.1% to the next 100 years of harmful emissions at a cost of $154 billion a year.

Seems a lot of money for not an awful lot of planet saving.

[Fretters]

The best thing about all this is that the agreement states nobody can leave the deal until after the first three years, and then it takes a year to complete the exit. So, the USA's exit from the agreement cannot be completed until 5 November 2020 which is the day after the next Presidential election.

[Damo]

Leonardo Dicapro travelled over 3 million miles last year to spread his message about climate change, and yet people still aren't listening

[timshorts]

It's difficult to see why an American President would do something like this. There's only two reasons for doing it, really

a) He really doesn't believe that global warming/climate change exists. I know that what he's said, but is he really that stupid?
b) He's said (a) but actually he's pursuing a policy of "I don't give a f as long as it means that we make more money". If everybody elsewhere is acting under self-imposed guidelines to reducing emissions, and the US isn't, then their gear is going to be cheaper to produce, hence easier to export for profit. The rules aren't the same now for US manufacturers as they are for the rest of the world.

Easy solution is stop buying their sh1t. Boycott them - not on a national scale, but on a personal one - just as companies that had links to South African goods were boycotted in the days of Apartheid (Barclays, I seem to remember). Most of the stuff they export is rubbish anyway. We can do without McDonalds. We don't need to keep up with the Kardashians (and never did).

[Hipper]

Plenty of Americans thought it was a bad deal for the US and they argue that Obama pushed it through without the approval of Congress. Trump therefore may not see that it is legally binding as it has not been ratified in the normal US way.

In any case even if the US has ratified the agreement properly, they may not implement the actions agreed. 'There are no penalties for non-compliance' (see 'How will parties be held account table', about half way down):

https://www.c2es.org/international/2015 ... e-talks-qa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also check 'Is the agreement Legally Binding' (about three quarters down) and below for the US position.

[USC]

he has not exactly told everyone in the USA to go polluting because it does not matter.

I think you'll find he basically has!

Lot of knee jerk comments on here from people jumping on the soundbyte wagon and the Trump haters band wagon, with very little original thought. But I did like the comment regarding what people are personally doing to lower the climate situation if you truly believe in it, when you have electric cars and heat your houses with solar power/heat pumps then I can see a valid reason to be critical of this action but little else!

Thanks goodness almost every world leader (and many US politicians and business leaders) do not share your opinion. Climate change, and attempts to slow it down, is a collective responsibility that can only be addressed at the collective level.

All Trump has done here is make himself look weak. As I am sure you have read New York and California have already stated they are pressing ahead with commitments. Pittsburgh's Mayor was appalled Pittsburgh was associated with Trump's reasoning. Other US politicians (other than the usual republican suspects) are against Trump's decision. Many business leaders are pressing on with reducing their carbon footprint. There are many reasons why States and Businesses will do their bit to support the Paris accord. Trump and the federal government is now simply an irrelevance where this is concerned.

[Imploding Turtle]

[bluelabrador16]

U.S. Military Is World’s Biggest Polluter By Whitney Webb

"Last week, mainstream media outlets gave minimal attention to the news that the U.S. Naval station in Virginia Beach had spilled an estimated 94,000 gallons of jet fuel into a nearby waterway, less than a mile from the Atlantic Ocean.

While the incident was by no means as catastrophic as some other pipeline spills, it underscores an important yet little-known fact—that the U.S. Department of Defense is both the nation's and the world's, largest polluter.

Producing more hazardous waste than the five largest U.S. chemical companies combined, the U.S. Department of Defense has left its toxic legacy throughout the world in the form of depleted uranium, oil, jet fuel, pesticides, defoliants like Agent Orange and lead, among others......

...U.S. military bases, both domestic and foreign, consistently rank among some of the most polluted places in the world, as perchlorate and other components of jet and rocket fuel contaminate sources of drinking water, aquifers and soil.....

.."Almost every military site in this country is seriously contaminated," John D. Dingell, a retired Michigan congressman and war veteran, told Newsweek in 2014...

....the U.S., which has conducted more nuclear weapons tests than all other nations combined, is also responsible for the massive amount of radiation that continues to contaminate many islands in the Pacific Ocean. The Marshall Islands, where the U.S. dropped more than sixty nuclear weapons between 1946 and 1958, are a particularly notable example. Inhabitants of the Marshall Islands and nearby Guam continue to experience an exceedingly high rate of cancer.

The American Southwest was also the site of numerous nuclear weapons tests that contaminated large swaths of land. Navajo Indian reservations have been polluted by long-abandoned uranium mines where nuclear material was obtained by U.S. military contractors.....

...One of the most recent testaments to the U.S. military's horrendous environmental record is Iraq. U.S. military action there has resulted in the desertification of 90 percent of Iraqi territory, crippling the country's agricultural industry and forcing it to import more than 80 percent of its food..

https://www.ecowatch.com/military-large ... 60609.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[bluelabrador16]

U.S. Military Is World’s Biggest Polluter By Whitney Webb

"Last week, mainstream media outlets gave minimal attention to the news that the U.S. Naval station in Virginia Beach had spilled an estimated 94,000 gallons of jet fuel into a nearby waterway, less than a mile from the Atlantic Ocean.

While the incident was by no means as catastrophic as some other pipeline spills, it underscores an important yet little-known fact—that the U.S. Department of Defense is both the nation's and the world's, largest polluter.

Producing more hazardous waste than the five largest U.S. chemical companies combined, the U.S. Department of Defense has left its toxic legacy throughout the world in the form of depleted uranium, oil, jet fuel, pesticides, defoliants like Agent Orange and lead, among others......

...U.S. military bases, both domestic and foreign, consistently rank among some of the most polluted places in the world, as perchlorate and other components of jet and rocket fuel contaminate sources of drinking water, aquifers and soil.....

.."Almost every military site in this country is seriously contaminated," John D. Dingell, a retired Michigan congressman and war veteran, told Newsweek in 2014...

....the U.S., which has conducted more nuclear weapons tests than all other nations combined, is also responsible for the massive amount of radiation that continues to contaminate many islands in the Pacific Ocean. The Marshall Islands, where the U.S. dropped more than sixty nuclear weapons between 1946 and 1958, are a particularly notable example. Inhabitants of the Marshall Islands and nearby Guam continue to experience an exceedingly high rate of cancer.

The American Southwest was also the site of numerous nuclear weapons tests that contaminated large swaths of land. Navajo Indian reservations have been polluted by long-abandoned uranium mines where nuclear material was obtained by U.S. military contractors.....

...One of the most recent testaments to the U.S. military's horrendous environmental record is Iraq. U.S. military action there has resulted in the desertification of 90 percent of Iraqi territory, crippling the country's agricultural industry and forcing it to import more than 80 percent of its food..

https://www.ecowatch.com/military-large ... 60609.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ElectroClaret]

Governors Brown (California) and Cuomo (new York) saying their states will still
seek to stick to the Paris Accord. Mayor of NY Michael Bloomberg also backing this.

Pittsburgh's mayor telling Trump to f**k off also.

He really is turning out to be a grade 'A' bell end.

[KateR]

I think you'll find he basically has!

Thanks goodness almost every world leader (and many US politicians and business leaders) do not share your opinion. Climate change, and attempts to slow it down, is a collective responsibility that can only be addressed at the collective level.

All Trump has done here is make himself look weak. As I am sure you have read New York and California have already stated they are pressing ahead with commitments. Pittsburgh's Mayor was appalled Pittsburgh was associated with Trump's reasoning. Other US politicians (other than the usual republican suspects) are against Trump's decision. Many business leaders are pressing on with reducing their carbon footprint. There are many reasons why States and Businesses will do their bit to support the Paris accord. Trump and the federal government is now simply an irrelevance where this is concerned.

It's a shame you don't understand the way of negotiating, you're probably going to vote Labour too.

All ready China and a couple of others have stated they are going to change the way they do things, you think this would have happened had he said, yes ok guys just tell me how much I need to pay, I've got my USA checkbook with me.

He gave the states freedom to do what they wanted, he never said he would stop or ban any American States from doing anything to do with how they managed climate control, just that he would not hold them to the "commitments" of the Paris accord.

Also just because I pass information to you regarding things do not assume I am in favour of them or not, I will tell you what I think/believe when I want to, the discussion/post was regarding Trump and what he has actually done and some of the ramifications.

[South West Claret.]

Is there much chance of the Tramp (and that's being a bit disrespectful to real Tramps) pulling out of life?