|
delfin posted:It won't be boring once proud God-fearing patriotic American patriots get Hillary impeached as Secretary of State - retroactively - and thus ruled ineligible for the Presidency. These people genuinely think Benghazi and off-the-books email are each a bigger deal than 9/11 and an incredibly costly, completely unnecessary war of imperialism based entirely on flagrant lies combined. What the gently caress.
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:14 |
|
|
"My dream ticket," she explained, "would be Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul. They both say exactly what they think." Another treasure from the Bernie rally. I think you could thread this needle. Free markets, but every business is a worker owned collective. Paul would just have to concede his position on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, since he's the veep.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 06:54
|
|
|
Arkane posted:The inevitable Hillary Clinton nomination really warms my heart. It certainly sounds like something you get off on.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
Arkane posted:The inevitable Hillary Clinton nomination really warms my heart. Wow, I can't imagine what happened in the Middle East that would account for all of those arms sales; it's a mystery. Also, why do you hate free market capitalism?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 07:40
|
|
|
A Bag of Milk posted:"My dream ticket," she explained, "would be Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul. They both say exactly what they think." She's an Anarcho-Syndicalist?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 07:44
|
|
|
Arkane posted:The inevitable Hillary Clinton nomination really warms my heart. Gee....it's almost like something happened from October 2010 to September 2012 that would cause Middle Eastern dictatorships to start spending a lot more money on military hardware. What could it be?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
It's almost like regional conflicts increase both arms sales and humanitarian transfers.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
I'm confused, is the consensus that it is totally okay to sell weapons to dictators to help suppress popular revolt?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 08:35
|
|
|
 huckabee is going to win the republican nomination
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 08:36
|
|
|
mugrim posted:I'm confused, is the consensus that it is totally okay to sell weapons to dictators to help suppress popular revolt? I can't speak for the consensus, but the list of arms transfers to other countries is incredibly damning. It's just been damning to all of our politicians, regardless of political affiliation, since the end of World War II. Arkane was inferring that Hillary was increasing arms sales to specific countries in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation. That particular argument doesn't have legs. The US will sell surplus weaponry to anyone who can afford it, with only an (extremely limited) list of exceptions. It's overly facile to claim that Iraq's $32 million order of 20 AAQ-33 Sniper Aircraft EO systems in 2012 is evidence of bribery, while their $180 million order of 378 Cougar APCs in 2006 is not. Claiming that the increase in arms sales in 2011 was evidence of bribery, rather than evidence of a bunch of dictators crapping their pants over popular revolt, is beyond facile -- it's actively stupid. It's also worth noting that most of the current arms export policy is dictated almost entirely by the War on Terror. After 9/11, the US lifted arms trade embargoes on Armenia, Azerbaijan, India, Indonesia, Montenegro, Pakistan, Serbia, Tajikistan, and Thailand. Those changes took place under the Bush administration, and Obama has continued that policy rather than changing it. The US will currently sell weapons to any dictator it thinks of as an ally in the War on Terror. Before it was the War on Terror, it was the War on Drugs. Before that, the Cold War. It's been a constant in all our past administrations, not just during Hillary's tenure as Secretary of State. In other words, it's totally not okay to sell weapons to dictators. The US does it anyway, and has for over half a century. We're responsible for approximately half of the global arms trade. On at least one occasion (Reagan), we've even violated our own sanctions to sell weapons to terrorists. Using those policies to attack any single candidate is disingenuous at best. Arkane's argument is apparently not that selling weapons to dictators is bad, nor even that increasing weapons sales to dictators is bad, but that the increase in weapons sales is evidence of corruption. The correct argument would be that the global arms trade is a force for evil, and needs to be curbed. Tobermory fucked around with this message at 09:17 on May 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 09:14
|
|
|
Yeah but Hillary did it.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 13:32
|
|
|
I've always been bothered by the some people aren't ready for democracy argument because it's always other people not them and it's usually said by people who hate China which is ironic because it's also China's argument for their voting system. A Bag of Milk posted:"My dream ticket," she explained, "would be Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul. They both say exactly what they think." There's apart of me who wants to see someone try this economic system just to watch all the different ways it would implode. Sir Tonk posted:Yeah but Hillary did it. A lot of people are still having a hard time dealing with the fact that if they're still a Obama supporter there's not much to complain about Hillary .The military industrial complex pretty much turns all presidents into varying degrees of hawkish.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
SirKibbles posted:
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Tobermory posted:is beyond facile -- it's actively stupid. An excellent summary of arkane if there ever was one. Seriously arkane you pop in here with some idiotic article that a three year old can tear apart every week, please learn some critical thinking skills TIA.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
SANTORUM is running now?!
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
ufarn posted:SANTORUM is running now?! America doesn't eat much fiber.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
SirKibbles posted:There's apart of me who wants to see someone try this economic system just to watch all the different ways it would implode. There have been quite a few studies on it. Worker owned collectives are hard to get a read unbiased read on because they are in a disadvantaged legal structure for most everything compared to a C-corp, so there is a hefty survivor bias at work. But you have things like Dabbwala which is incredibly optimized for productivity while still having redundancy - it has an error rate of 1 in 8 million and has uninterrupted service, even in the event of monsoons. This from a collective that has been around since 1890. Or Shawmut Construction, which is competing and thriving in the highly competitive NYC and Boston construction markets. And ESOPs (which are employee owned but not democratically organized) typically show higher productivity and sales as well, to the tune of ~8%. Like I said, survivor bias is heavily in play but what data there is suggests worker owned and democratically organized companies or even just employee owned companies can do extremely well. Some economists studying them to follow up with would be Brent Kramer, Nancy Folbre, and Richard D Wolff.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:An excellent summary of arkane if there ever was one. I'm still not sure how Arkane is so good at connecting stock market dots but so bad at connecting politics dots.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I'm still not sure how Arkane is so good at connecting stock market dots but so bad at connecting politics dots. Because numbers tend to have absolute meaning. Words do not.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
Tobermory posted:Gee....it's almost like something happened from October 2010 to September 2012 that would cause Middle Eastern dictatorships to start spending a lot more money on military hardware. What could it be? First we gotta grease the skids a bit with some graft, but then we can get the tools we need to clamp down on our meddlesome citizens! Tobermory posted:Arkane's argument is apparently not that selling weapons to dictators is bad, nor even that increasing weapons sales to dictators is bad, but that the increase in weapons sales is evidence of corruption. The correct argument would be that the global arms trade is a force for evil, and needs to be curbed. "I'll just make up Arkane's position for him, and then disagree with it" = about half the responses to my posts. I think the correct argument is that all 3 of those things are bad? Maybe? Just to be clear, since you are kinda squeaking past the point of the post: you are cool with large donations from bad countries and personal donations to politicians and then those countries subsequently benefiting from the decisions of said politician? This is all good in your eyes? We'll likely never know for certain if there was any kind of quid pro quo, so perhaps the appearance at least is bad?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
SirKibbles posted:A lot of people are still having a hard time dealing with the fact that if they're still a Obama supporter there's not much to complain about Hillary .The military industrial complex pretty much turns all presidents into varying degrees of hawkish. I seriously doubt Arkane was an Obama supporter.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Just to be clear, since you are kinda squeaking past the point of the post: you are cool with large donations from bad countries and personal donations to politicians and then those countries subsequently benefiting from the decisions of said politician? This is all good in your eyes? We'll likely never know for certain if there was any kind of quid pro quo, so perhaps the appearance at least is bad? If appearance meant diddly then OJ wouldn't have gotten off the hook. Edit: Now he may not have, but why are there so many Google hits for Glenn Beck raping and murdering a girl in 1990. Maybe he didn't do anything wrong but doesn't this appear kinda bad? Gin and Juche fucked around with this message at 16:13 on May 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:If appearance meant diddly then OJ wouldn't have gotten off the hook. It does? I'm not sure where you're going with this, since most of us are pretty sure Glenn Beck is a bad person regardless of whether or not he raped and killed a girl in 1990.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
Weltlich posted:It does? I'm not sure where you're going with this, since most of us are pretty sure Glenn Beck is a bad person regardless of whether or not he raped and killed a girl in 1990. I understand that Glenn Beck is a bad person. I am suggesting that just because he is known to be a bad person he can't currently be put in jail because it appears as though he raped and murdered a girl in 1990. There simply is no evidence to suggest this. This could mean that Glenn Beck simply didn't rape and murder a girl in 1990, or that he has become very effective at destroying or covering up evidence from his various rapes and murders that no such evidence exists that he raped and murdered a girl in 1990. See?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Just to be clear, since you are kinda squeaking past the point of the post: you are cool with large donations from bad countries and personal donations to politicians and then those countries subsequently benefiting from the decisions of said politician? Your own goddamn summary says that 16 of the 20 bad countries had their deals arranged by the Pentagon and the State Dept. just rubber stamped it. And where is you complaining about all the arms deals to the KSA before January 20th 2009? hmm?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:I understand that Glenn Beck is a bad person. I am suggesting that just because he is known to be a bad person he can't currently be put in jail because it appears as though he raped and murdered a girl in 1990. There simply is no evidence to suggest this. This could mean that Glenn Beck simply didn't rape and murder a girl in 1990, or that he has become very effective at destroying or covering up evidence from his various rapes and murders that no such evidence exists that he raped and murdered a girl in 1990. See? Oh! I see now! You're saying that Hillary can't not be elected because she seems to have accepted large donations from dictatorships across the Middle East. She either didn't take money directly for weapons sales and other kick backs, or that she's really good at hiding the fact that she did. Got it.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
Weltlich posted:Oh! I see now! It'd appear so.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Your own goddamn summary says that 16 of the 20 bad countries had their deals arranged by the Pentagon and the State Dept. just rubber stamped it. I like your use of "rubber stamp" as if it's just some low level moron in a room giving his a-okay. Raskolnikov38 posted:And where is you complaining about all the arms deals to the KSA before January 20th 2009? hmm? Well if we can find the appearance of quid pro quo on a multiple country scale as well as direct payments to spouses, that would indeed be analogous to what I am posting and real bad. You're saying this is the case? You guys are really going to be bending yourself in pretzels to defend Hillary over the next 18 months.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
mugrim posted:I'm confused, is the consensus that it is totally okay to sell weapons to dictators to help suppress popular revolt? Arkane said it though, he could say the sky is blue and you'd have dumbasses here trying to argue.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Well if we can find the appearance of quid pro quo on a multiple country scale as well as direct payments to spouses, that would indeed be analogous to what I am posting and real bad. You're saying this is the case? No, only you are saying that there's an appearance of quid pro quo and direct payments to spouses. Everyone else isn't a low level moron.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
Arkane posted:I like your use of "rubber stamp" as if it's just some low level moron in a room giving his a-okay. Are you really going to pretend that any other person as Sec of State, other than Bernie Sanders, would have blocked those deals? Because if so I've got some bridges and land for sale you might be interested in.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Deep Hurting posted:These people genuinely think Benghazi and off-the-books email are each a bigger deal than 9/11 and an incredibly costly, completely unnecessary war of imperialism based entirely on flagrant lies combined. democrats did it
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
tsa posted:Arkane said it though, he could say the sky is blue and you'd have dumbasses here trying to argue. Man constantly caught arguing in bad faith not given benefit of the doubt in future arguments.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Are you really going to pretend that any other person as Sec of State, other than Bernie Sanders, would have blocked those deals? Because if so I've got some bridges and land for sale you might be interested in. Moreover, the most relevant thing in the election of Hillary Clinton as the next President is whether a GOP Secretary of State would have blocked those deals. To be fair, the Bush family is well known for being ardent foes of the Saudi despots.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Are you really going to pretend that any other person as Sec of State, other than Bernie Sanders, would have blocked those deals? Because if so I've got some bridges and land for sale you might be interested in. Why do you think Bernie would have blocked those deals?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Why do you think Bernie would have blocked those deals? Out of all the people currently running for President he is the least hawkish.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Is Vermin Supreme not running?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:Is Vermin Supreme not running? Touche
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Shut up Walkerquote:"The media tried to make that sound like that was a crazy idea," Walker said of the mandatory ultrasound bill he signed into law in 2013. "Most people I talked to, whether they're pro-life or not, I find people all the time that pull out their iPhone and show me a picture of their grandkids' ultrasound and how excited they are, so that's a lovely thing." quote:"My sons are 19 and 20, we still have their first ultrasounds. It's just a cool thing out there," he said http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7451948
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:14 |
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Out of all the people currently running for President he is the least hawkish. He voted against the 2008 India nuclear technology deal. Which was civilian technology, and related to his anti-nuclear power stance not any anti-selling hardware stance. Past that, every "let's sell some weapons" vote that's come up he and Clinton have voted the same on it. Being against the U.S. fighting a war does not translate to being opposed to selling weapons to the folks who are fighting a war. the New York Times has a breakdown but Hillary and Bernie have a voting record that is 93% the same. It's is rather hard to make the case that there is a radical difference between them, instead of there being a difference in focus and tactics.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 18:00
|
|