- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Climate Melters Are Not Paying Attention
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:03 am to Jobu93
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:03 am to Jobu93
quote:
Well since it was a non binding deal they shouldn't feel too bad that we aren't participating.
It's a lot of drama coming from both sides. One side is acting like the US is about to destroy the world, and the other is cheering like the US just withdrew from the worst deal ever, when in fact, this was really all just a show from Trump and really impacts nothing.
If Trump really wanted to negotiate, he could have stayed in and negotiated while at the table.
4
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:04 am to Jobu93
quote:
So, if we hadn't said NO to the deal, and then just not participated whilst trying to renegotiate, that would have been okay?
yeah
it would have been more effective IMO
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:05 am to Salmon
quote:
Why should they negotiate another deal to satisfy the US (and Syria)?
Welcome back.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:06 am to Salmon
quote:
Ok. Then they get what they get, then. If they don't want to negotiate, then don't cry about having no climate deal.
Well, they have a deal.
This is what you said...
But nobody is going to negotiate another deal, so it's basically an empty sound bite.
Therefore, what's the big deal with us not being in it. They have a deal. Let them live with the consequences, or the benefits of the deal.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:06 am to Salmon
So we have a disagreement here, but we ain't running shite.
I'd rather state intentions plainly and move on.
I'd rather state intentions plainly and move on.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:06 am to roadGator
just stating factPosted on 6/2/17 at 9:06 am to Salmon
quote:
It's a lot of drama coming from both sides. One side is acting like the US is about to destroy the world, and the other is cheering like the US just withdrew from the worst deal ever
This is closer to the truth.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:07 am to Salmon
Uh huh. Nice try. It was a passive aggressive dig. We both know it. 
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:07 am to Jobu93
quote:
I'd rather state intentions plainly and move on.
I think Trump made his intentions clear.
That is why I said in my first reply that he willingness to negotiate is really just a nice sound bite.
If he really wanted to negotiate, he would have stayed in.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:08 am to roadGator
of course it was
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:09 am to Salmon
quote:
If he really wanted to negotiate, he would have stayed in.
Or maybe, you know, he wants to let Congress have a say in a true Treaty that is binding to all participants? Just a guess.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:11 am to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
He won't be around to do that. He has one foot out of the door.
Our hit and run artist is back.
If you can stay in a thread long enough to answer a question about your statement...
Why is one foot out the door? He has 3 1/2 years (At LEAST) left.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:11 am to SidewalkDawg
quote:
Or maybe, you know, he wants to let Congress have a say in a true Treaty that is binding to all participants? Just a guess.
Maybe, but I doubt it
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:13 am to Salmon
quote:
But nobody is going to negotiate another deal, so it's basically an empty sound bite.
Because they were happy for America to make the biggest sacrifice and pay the biggest cost.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:16 am to Jobu93
quote:
That agreement had China and India, two of the largest countries, running roughshod until 2030 while the US was being immediately strapped financially. Last time I checked, there is only one atmosphere. To have two countries who use the most pollutive means of energy production not only continue on their path but open even more plants while we hamstring ourselves is just a terrible deal for our country.
If this accord addresses such a dire and immediate need, countries who feel aggrieved that we aren't participating should perhaps look to create a more equitable deal for all parties involved. Just because the USA has the ability to foot the bill for something doesn't mean we should. There's a lot of freeloading countries out there that should understand that the time of free handouts is over.
THIS! x1000
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:20 am to Douboy
quote:
One of the first things the President said yesterday in his speech is that he is willing to negotiate a new climate deal that is more advantageous to the United States.
Why is that a problem?
He's being disingenuous. Nobody is willing to renegotiate with us. You can't negotiate by yourself.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:25 am to Salmon
quote:
If Trump really wanted to negotiate, he could have stayed in and negotiated while at the table.
SMH. Negotiation 101: when dealing from a position of power against a weaker yet uncompromising adversary, break off discussions to send a message.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:27 am to Salmon
Salmon I have always considered you a reasonable poster, can you take a shot at this question, posted earlier in another thread.
quote:
Can someone please explain how borrowing money from China to give to China somehow helps with climate change and does anything other than finance the globalist agenda on the backs of future generations of Americans?
If someone can give a reasonable response it would be appreciated.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:27 am to Salmon
But you previously said that nobody would renegotiate a new deal. What does it matter if he "stayed at the table" as you said if nobody would renegotiate a deal? You are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Posted on 6/2/17 at 9:28 am to Dick Leverage
quote:
But you previously said that nobody would renegotiate a new deal. What does it matter if he "stayed at the table" as you said if nobody would renegotiate a deal? You are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
a new deal is not the same as negotiating the current deal
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News