|
Stultus Maximus posted:"Domestic" There are two kinds of oil: Overseas, and domestic.
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:25 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:72% is not "almost everyone", since a full quarter of the population opposed it. Hillary Clinton is hardly a representative of the sort of "everyone" you're talking about here anyway - within her cohort, Democratic Congressmembers, she was in a minority.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:Nobody will survive an election (nor will their party) for raising gas prices to a massive degree, and all the add-on effects that would have. Saudi Arabia is going to have a very bad ever after the moment that something aside from oil becomes more cost efficient. http://content.usatoday.com/communi.../1#.VTfiOLph01g quote:Think gas is pricey at the pump? Try your tax bill instead, with an economic analysis putting the U.S. military tab on keeping Middle Eastern crude coming at more than $225 billion a year over the last three decades.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:"Domestic" Lmao oh no everybody the Canadian Tyrants are going to dominate our foreign policy
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Chamale posted:There are two kinds of oil: Overseas, and domestic. I believe the appropriate terms are "clean energy" and "foreign oil." What politician in America is for dependence on foreign oil and against clean energy? Not one in office, I tell you what. Not one representing the will of their constituency.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:"Domestic" Theres plenty of whining about domestic pipelines too, its just usually only makes into your local papers. And yes I will concede that 72% of the country and a slim majority of democratic senators isn't almost everybody but she was absolutely not alone. If a quarter of the country was opposed that means approximately half the democratic voters in this country supported the war.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Are there any poll numbers matching Bernie Sanders against various Republican candidates? not that I can find but something tells me the guy who calls himself a socialist wouldn't fare too well
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Within her actual cohort of Democratic Senators she was in the majority: 29 of 50 voted for it. 29 out of 50 - wow talk about an overwhelming consensus. I also like the notion that because X number of Clinton's colleagues may have wanted something, she is totally excused from any responsibility for voting with them even though said vote caused a million loving deaths. What in the actual poo poo is going on in this thread?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:29 out of 50 - wow talk about an overwhelming consensus. I also like the notion that because X number of Clinton's colleagues may have wanted something, she is totally excused from any responsibility for voting with them even though said vote caused a million loving deaths. What in the actual poo poo is going on in this thread? Man you are going to be really mad on Jan 21 2017.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Within her actual cohort of Democratic Senators she was in the majority: 29 of 50 voted for it. Are you going to argue why this is the relevant group, rather than the group who authorized the war overall? Did the Senate Democrats lack some unique information House Democrats had that convinced House Democrats to oppose the war in opposition to popular sentiment while the Senators did not? Like, what is your point here?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Radbot posted:So we'd all rather suck Saudi dick than try to move to domestic energy sources. OK then, I can see why Americans would want to do that (they're very stupid). Oil is why we care about the region, but it's not the reason we're friendly with the house of Saud. A lot of politicians are still working on a weird variant of the Nixon doctrine -- having allies in the region is considered to be more important than what those allies actually do, and we protect those allies at all costs. That's why we support the Saudi government, and that's why over 2/3 of Republicans just said that Israel is an important ally and we should support it even if our interests diverge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Hillary is the next President, not even the next nominee. Please understand that, that's just the way life is? That said if Bernie runs he's got my primary vote.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Radbot posted:
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
zoux posted:Man you are going to be really mad on Jan 21 2017. I've totally made peace with Hillary as POTUS. Barring something huge, it's going to happen. That doesn't mean the idiots in this thread defending her Iraq vote aren't
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:29 out of 50 - wow talk about an overwhelming consensus. I also like the notion that because X number of Clinton's colleagues may have wanted something, she is totally excused from any responsibility for voting with them even though said vote caused a million loving deaths. What in the actual poo poo is going on in this thread? Why don't you feel the same way about the AMF for the GWOT? A few voted against it, correctly articulating that a blank check would get us into a never ending war (which it has). It has certainly led to many many deaths. Why isn't voting for the GWOT a litmus test vote for you too? GlyphGryph posted:Are you going to argue why this is the relevant group, rather than the group who authorized the war overall? Did the Senate Democrats lack some unique information House Democrats had that convinced House Democrats to oppose the war in opposition to popular sentiment while the Senators did not? Like, what is your point here? Yeah the Senate Democrats lacked the information that Pelosi would break their kneecaps if they broke rank. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
The big question, what are the alternatives? Frankly, there aren't any good options other than nudging folks in the region to get their poo poo together so we don't have to. Now Israel, there's a nation with its poo poo together. We don't need to station a carrier battlegroup off Israel to keep the eastern med sea energy flowing, you can trust Israel to keep exports to Europe flowing on their own.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:The big question, what are the alternatives? Frankly, there aren't any good options other than nudging folks in the region to get their poo poo together so we don't have to. You're correct, we don't have to station a Carrier Group to protect Israeli Oil. There really isn't enough Israeli Oil to make it worth protecting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Why don't you feel the same way about the AMF for the GWOT? A few voted against it, correctly articulating that a blank check would get us into a never ending war (which it has). It has certainly led to many many deaths. Because the AUMF is merely a flawed legal declaration that is arguably necessary in certain circumstances and has been used to do some good in the world along with the bad. Also the AUMF wasn't predicated on complete horseshit that even a middle schooler could puzzle out. Comparing the AUMF to regime change in Iraq is something I'd expect on Reddit, not here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Hillary is the next President, not even the next nominee. Please understand that, that's just the way life is? This. SCOTUS appointments are the real prize of the presidency since having the court lean one way or the other can either overturn horribly backwards laws (segregation, abortion) or confirm completely horrible laws (hobby lobby, citizens united). Also...  at anyone dumb enough to think that President Sanders/Warren will somehow lead to a socialist utopia with with the republicans controlling both house and senate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Also... What about those who just think a President Sanders/Warrens would be less likely to get us into another foreign war? Also, Chafee voted against the war, and was in fact the only Republican Senator to do so. I was completely serious when I said I like Chafee. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Apr 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Also...
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:I've totally made peace with Hillary as POTUS. Barring something huge, it's going to happen. That doesn't mean the idiots in this thread defending her Iraq vote aren't You're the worst kind of politically active individual. The purity test type. It's disingenuous to think that Hillary should be crucified for a vote that is well within the majority of not only the Congress, but also her party, and BY FAR the majority of the US at the time. Stop being an obtuse idiot - this is par for the course.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:What about those who just think a President Sanders/Warrens would be less likely to get us into another foreign war? Yup... it was those drat democrats that dragged us all totally kicking and screaming into Iraq in 03. e: YOLO  $1000 donation to the charity of your choice if president Hillary gets us into a foreign war that isn't in response to a major terrorist attack (1k+ dead) or a humanitarian crisis that the UN authorizes (Balkans/Somalia).
A Winner is Jew fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Apr 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
Boon posted:You're the worst kind of politically active individual. The purity test type. Yeah "not voting for genocide": the ultimate purity test.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
If Hillary starts another war on the scale of Iraq, but also follows through with her promise to "topple the 1%" I'll consider everything a net positive. i mean, one is vastly more likely than the other, but a man can dream
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Yeah "not voting for genocide": the ultimate purity test. Yeah man. The bill simply read, "We're going to kill all them dirty fertile crescent sons of bitches" That was the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Yeah "not voting for genocide": the ultimate purity test.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Yeah "not voting for genocide": the ultimate purity test. You're kind of throwing around genocide here and while I'm not trying to be pedantic "killing a whole bunch of people" is not synonymous. I don't think that the goal of OIF was the systematic and industrialized extermination of Iraqis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Yeah "not voting for genocide": the ultimate purity test. The authorization of force for Iraq did not tell the administration to maximize civilian casualties, just that whatever force is necessary to defend the US. Now, we all know what happened and that language is a joke but hell he could have told congress to rip up the war powers act as its unconstitutional and gone in anyways.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
To be fair it's very difficult for Democratic Presidents to recognize genocide. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/22/barack-obama-will-not-label-1915-massacre-of-armenians-a-genocide
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
J33uk posted:To be fair it's very difficult for Democratic Presidents to recognize genocide. The result being that Turkey is being nicer to the Kurds than any other time in the last several decades so while this is bullshit in a vacuum him not calling the Armenian genocide a genocide isn't actually happening in a vacuum.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
But seriously, Chafee: Has been a Republican (way more of a "maverick" than McCain ever was) Independent and Democrat Supports same sex marriage Opposes Charter Schools Was the only Republican in the Senate to go against his party and oppose the Iraq War Supports increasing taxes Pro-choice to the extent he voted against the partial-birth abortion ban Opposes military and law enforcement overreach Does not opposed (though does not explicitly support) legalizing marijuana recreationally Supported McCain-Feingold Refused an order of a federal court to transfer a prisoner in state custody to the United States government, because the prisoner in question might be subject to capital punishment, which Rhode Island had abolished. At the time, Chafee said, "my actions are motivated by my obligation as governor to safeguard Rhode Island’s sovereignty and the integrity of its laws." Voted against the Bush Tax Cuts Opposes Israeli settlements in the West Bank Supports negotiations with Iran Why would Chafee not make a better President than Hillary is what I suppose I would ask right now. Why should I support Hillary instead? A Winner is Jew posted:e: YOLO GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Apr 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:The big question, what are the alternatives? Frankly, there aren't any good options other than nudging folks in the region to get their poo poo together so we don't have to. I can't believe I'm responding to you but the alternatives include initiating a domestic alternative energy "Manhattan Project" and letting the Mideast devolve into the barbaric chaos they seem to want to practice without our interference. If the Chinese or Russians or Australians or Canadians think the stability of the region is that important, they can deal with it. We can even sell them the planes and bombs. And if they don't think it is, we can sell them our cutting edge alternative energy technology.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:The Democrats will probably win back the Senate in 2016, so that'll be a two-year window where executive actions and appointments can go through at least There are only even odds of this now that Reid is out. Dems need to pick up 5 to account for losing Reid's seat, and the only ones probably on the table are PA, WI, IL and MAYBE FL.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:But seriously, Chaffee: Republican primary voters = he has a 0.0% chance of making it past Iowa for one. GlyphGryph posted:This would be more meaningful if it covered a situation like the war with Iraq, since even Bush didn't do that. Iraq had (a) nothing to do with a terrorist attack and (b) was not a humanitarian crisis that was authorized by the UN.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Republican primary voters = he has a 0.0% chance of making it past Iowa for one. Chafee is running as a Democrat, why would Republican primary voters matter? He is not that stupid. A Winner is Jew posted:Iraq had (a) nothing to do with a terrorist attack and (b) was not a humanitarian crisis that was authorized by the UN. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Apr 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Republican primary voters = he has a 0.0% chance of making it past Iowa for one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
zoux posted:You're kind of throwing around genocide here and while I'm not trying to be pedantic "killing a whole bunch of people" is not synonymous. I don't think that the goal of OIF was the systematic and industrialized extermination of Iraqis. Fair enough, I'll walk back the use of that word because you're right - the use of force in Iraq wasn't literally a pro-genocide measure. It should however be noted that Dick Cheney went on CNN in 1997 and when asked why Desert Storm didn't go into Baghdad, he noted the power vacuum caused by a fall of the Baathists would result in a huge chaotic mess that could trigger another war with Iran or a civil war. When 1997 Dick Cheney has this poo poo figured out better than you do 5 years later, then you've got loving problems. This isn't some little policy quibble- the invasion of Iraq was an inestimable blunder that calls into question the judgment and/or motivation of any human being that supported it. Hillary doesn't get to just shrug and look at the camera while a sad trombone sound plays. I mean if you want to be as bad as the people who ignore Reagan's treason or excuse Bush's ineptitude then go ahead. She was either too concerned with the politics of voting no or too incurious to realize the justification for war was completely fabricated. Take your pick on which one is more palatable. Unzip and Attack fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Apr 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
This is pedantic, I know, but it's Chafee, guys. One f.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:25 |
|
|
Franco Potente posted:This is pedantic, I know, but it's Chafee, guys. One f. Goddamnit, I know this but I just can't stop spelling it wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 19:43
|
|