|
I admit I am not in a bad state and so I cannot speak for others, but I would pay more for good things and I am ok with higher gas prices, getting away from harming people and environment. Crush Saudi Arabia. They are responsible for a lot of misery in that region.
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary stay on the release of Trump's communications on 1/6. However, the panel hearing the arguments at the end of the month are all Dem appointees. Doesn't matter. It's just delay delay delay. This is just for like 50 pages of documents. They are effectively dragging all of this out because they know there's a good chance the Rs win next November and squash all of this
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary stay on the release of Trump's communications on 1/6. However, the panel hearing the arguments at the end of the month are all Dem appointees. Irritating and also unremarkable, they can't really un-release the documents if they make the unlikely bad decision. Zotix posted:Doesn't matter. It's just delay delay delay. This is just for like 50 pages of documents. They are effectively dragging all of this out because they know there's a good chance the Rs win next November and squash all of this yeah this is definitely the Trump strategy
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2021 23:25
|
|
|
It certainly worked for several lawsuits against Trump while he was president. The emoluments lawsuit got thrown out because the whole thing dragged on so long that the courts had to dismiss the lawsuit as moot earlier this year due to him no longer being President.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
I don't understand why if executive privilege is determined by the sitting President that the appeals court can't easily say denied. Because they will rule at the end of the month and then it is appeal to the supreme court which will be heard in 2023 or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2021 23:51
|
|
|
the_steve posted:Fister Roboto beat me to it, but yeah, I'm gonna need to see the post celebrating the loving over of the poors. I already did in the very first post, why didn't you look instead of just taking the word of Fister? Booourns posted:Wow it sure sucks when the "economic sanctions" are being applied to you instead of the other way around huh Literally the first post I responded to. Note how the sarcasm shows a pretty clear intention to celebrate the fact that the US is suffering from sanctions for once. What Booourns missed was that it primarily hits the poor, who literally had nothing to do with the creation or continuation of economic sanctions and that the US isn't some homogeneous block of people. Kinda weird how both you and Fister somehow completely missed this. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:04
|
|
|
We get it, you're really pious because you're so extremely concerned about the poor you're scolding posters online that note the US is getting a taste of its own medicine. But also, Saudi Arabia being responsible for high energy prices is dubious in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:08
|
|
|
Zotix posted:I don't understand why if executive privilege is determined by the sitting President that the appeals court can't easily say denied. Because they will rule at the end of the month and then it is appeal to the supreme court which will be heard in 2023 or whatever. the entire apparatus was built with the idea that good people will work hard to make america great for everyone. then the rich folks built their domes and made sure all the good oxygen got pumped into their dome. bush jr really started dismantling it, he was a career monster with lots of career monster in his corner.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:10
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:They are not endorsing it, they are saying that's how it is. Its a stretch to suddenly say they endorse it. And as a mod I'm not going to read it like that. This is kind of an absurd ruling to make in this thread imo. It is a near-constant occurrence here that someone criticizing the democrats’ electoral strategies or policies on offer is immediately replied to with some variant of “oh so I guess the republicans would be better huh? Seems you don’t really care about minorities, very revealing of you” and that’s apparently fine, but reading agreement into a statement like “it’s pointless for the US to not sell weapons to Saudi Arabia because they’d get them somewhere else anyway” is a shocking attack on that posters morals. Why is one assumption tolerated, while the other precipitates an official ruling that assuming this is wrong and unfair? I don’t see the distinction here. I’d also argue that the “realpolitik” of it being pointless is in no way an obvious or settled fact, given how influential the US is on the world stage, and how many tools we continually use to bend other countries to our will,* but that’s not really relevant to my point above. *I think most of these methods are abhorrent, but if we’re talking about the US conducting “business as usual,” then all those actions fall under that same category of stuff the US does on a daily basis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:10
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:This is kind of an absurd ruling to make in this thread imo. It is a near-constant occurrence here that someone criticizing the democrats’ electoral strategies or policies on offer is immediately replied to with some variant of “oh so I guess the republicans would be better huh? Seems you don’t really care about minorities, very revealing of you” and that’s apparently fine, but reading agreement into a statement like “it’s pointless for the US to not sell weapons to Saudi Arabia because they’d get them somewhere else anyway” is a shocking attack on that posters morals. Why is one assumption tolerated, while the other precipitates an official ruling that assuming this is wrong and unfair? I don’t see the distinction here. The problem is it getting reported as "genocide justification" which is not what it is, and reading into people's posts (which the poster came back and clarified) to set traps for them is really lovely. This gotcha level poo poo is petty and stupid. If you believe a poster is saying something, ask them. Don't go straight to the accusations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:23
|
|
|
People reporting that post were clearly being silly, it's a perfectly okay opinion to have in the American context. But the reactions in this thread were fine as well, just because the poster later damage controlled in a weird way doesn't change the original statement. Not everything needs modding action.
Fame Douglas fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Nov 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:29
|
|
|
Meanwhile in the other shitshow murder trial... https://twitter.com/Phil_Lewis_/status/1458872267371393027
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I already did in the very first post, why didn't you look instead of just taking the word of Fister? Yes, I saw your first post and it seemed like a wildly uncharitable interpretation of the post you quoted. Like the exact polar opposite of the point they were trying to make (which is that economic sanctions are bad). I genuinely have no idea how you interpreted that as celebration.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:42
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Stories about Lowtax weirdly ended up on the front-page of British tabloids, Reuters, Vice, Newsweek, Engadget, and PC Gamer today. I wouldn't really call that "getindianews.com" article an investigation--looks like it's just random clickbait. I mean, these are definitely some worrying findings: quote:It is being rumored and speculated that Lowtax Kyanka has died but the reason for his death still remains unknown as of this point in time, we are here to update you about the whole scenario, Richard Kyanka is the founder of the Something Awful site, it seems to be a comedy site which contains several contents. The site includes blog entries, featured articles, forums, digitally edited pictures, and humorous media reviews, there are speculations that are going on over the internet about the man passing away and people seem to be pretty curious when it comes to know about the man. My guess is that website does something similar for every death that gets internet attention; e.g.: https://getindianews.com/is-corbin-wilgenbusch-dead-or-alive-death-hoax-explained/ https://getindianews.com/is-aamir-liaquat-dead-or-alive-pakistani-television-host-death-hoax-explained/ https://getindianews.com/is-dr-alice-wolf-dvm-dead-or-alive-death-hoax-explained/ https://getindianews.com/is-lee-horsley-dead-or-alive-american-actor-death-hoax-explained/ Sir John Falstaff fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Nov 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:51
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I already did in the very first post, why didn't you look instead of just taking the word of Fister? I thought I clarified it better in my second post, but I was merely poking fun at the senate aide complaining that Saudi Arabia was putting the screws to them because the US elected a president who they are not particularly friendly with, right after the US imposed sanctions on Nicaragua because they elected someone they are not friendly with
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Yes, I saw your first post and it seemed like a wildly uncharitable interpretation of the post you quoted. Like the exact polar opposite of the point they were trying to make (which is that economic sanctions are bad). I genuinely have no idea how you interpreted that as celebration. "How do you like it" is 100% a smug celebration of "the shoe being on the other foot". Especially if the post was made in the context of attacking a poster complaining about sanctions being bad. Solkanar512 posted:I already did in the very first post, why didn't you look instead of just taking the word of Fister? Lol this is the saddest, most pathetic button-pushing I think I've seen. You really probated him for providing a link instead of a quote? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 00:58
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:Describing not being partner to murdering hundreds of thousands as "some kind of principled stand" like it's a vague interpersonal moral tiff rather than a distinct red line glowing so bright you can see it from space? I dunno dude idk if you are unaware of the history of the region, but refusing to arm groups has had absolutely massive ramifications (eg the us' refusal to arm the egyptians adequately, for one) for everyone involved and afaict that is what is being referenced? It's a statement about how utterly uncaring the international arms industry is and not an endorsement of it, unless i completely missed someone endorsing the status quo like we seem to be back at the 'explaining something means you support it' poo poo FlamingLiberal posted:The idea of the Saudis getting into a hot war with Iran makes me laugh Yeah it's not even really hyperbole to say that ksa managed to lose a genocide. The buildup for war is still very real, but hopefully their unbelievably inept performance was enough to push the timeline for the war with iran back at least a few more years. And to say nothing of Iran, even the Houthis made it clear that they had ample ability to cause damage within KSA more or less with impunity. The KSA border with yemen remains as unsecured as ever (and KSA is probably the least capable of defending it that they ever have been) and the Houthi's drone capabilities clearly are able to destroy saudi infrastructure basically at will. Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Nov 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:02
|
|
|
We're at "writing like you're supporting something sounds like you're supporting something" poo poo. It's really not hard to see, reading the original post. Later "explanations" don't change anything, people reacted the right way because they couldn't read a later "explanation" that hadn't been posted yet! But I'm sure refusing to arm Saudia Arabia would have terrible ramifications for the region (why the gently caress did you add that tidbit, really counteracts your whole point) Fame Douglas fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Nov 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:03
|
|
|
This Rittenhouse trial poo poo is so hosed. I'm sorry I don't have any intelligent or reasonable critique of why it's hosed. It just is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:11
|
|
|
The core issue is that if you have 500 billion to buy weapons, you are going to be buying 500 billion of weapons, idk how much morality factors into any of it. If the US doesn't sell them weapons they'll just buy them from russians/french/british/china/whoever. Afaik there isn't a single country's arms industry that is particularly concerned with how moral the sale/purchaser's intentions are. Like even insofar as american support gets with held from KSA's military because of the blockade/genocide in yemen, it's primarily via limiting military cooperation and coordination and training and maintenance. The arms sales were never even remotely on the table.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:15
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:The core issue is that if you have 500 billion to buy weapons, you are going to be buying 500 billion of weapons, idk how much morality factors into any of it. If the US doesn't sell them weapons they'll just buy them from russians/french/british/china/whoever. Afaik there isn't a single country's arms industry that is particularly concerned with how moral the sale/purchaser's intentions are. IIRC they did in fact limit sales of ground attack munitions over that. The new big arms sale to Saudi was air to air missiles, and the previous big one was air defense systems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:18
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:The core issue is that if you have 500 billion to buy weapons, you are going to be buying 500 billion of weapons, idk how much morality factors into any of it. If the US doesn't sell them weapons they'll just buy them from russians/french/british/china/whoever. Afaik there isn't a single country's arms industry that is particularly concerned with how moral the sale/purchaser's intentions are. Yes, clearly the US doesn't chose who it sells its arms to. It's pure business. And also, that is very much fine and good. And clearly, no other countries limits arms sales, either. Seriously, how do you write with authority knowing so little about pretty much any subject.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:23
|
|
|
Yes 'fine and good' is definitely my point in outlining that, idk how you get to that conclusion lol the whole situation is peak military industrial complex dysfunction.
Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Nov 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:30
|
|
|
i would have thought "i didn't mean it like that" would have been the end to the conversation of whether or not they meant it like that but here we are 6 hours later...
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:i would have thought "i didn't mean it like that" would have been the end to the conversation of whether or not they meant it like that but here we are 6 hours later... So irritated at people continuing a dead conversation that you're now further continuing that conversation in order to express your irritation with those people. Now I continue the conversation even longer by lacking the self-control to not point out how counterproductive your behavior is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 01:50
|
|
|
What is a reasonable way for the grassroots and/or establishment to achieve a successful American labor movement? As laughable as trying to court republicans by destroying your own agenda is, a full power gently caress it political career ending modern american labor move could be the only point left to stick our, uh, pole-vaulting-pole
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 02:08
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Lol this is the saddest, most pathetic button-pushing I think I've seen. You really probated him for providing a link instead of a quote? If you want to whine about probes, go to QCS or message a Real Mod about it. This thread isn't the place for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 02:11
|
|
|
BRJohnson posted:a full power gently caress it political career ending modern american labor move What do you mean by this? Some sort of pro-labor action that would be so, uh, controversial(?) that it would end somebody or multiple people's careers?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 02:13
|
|
|
You know, like a strike but really big. Generally.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 02:15
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The problem is it getting reported as "genocide justification" which is not what it is, and reading into people's posts (which the poster came back and clarified) to set traps for them is really lovely. Sure, I’m happy to ask. I hope that standard is applied to posts about other things, as well! Quick question though- if the OP ignores those questions, can we then make assumptions working from the post they made? InsertPotPun posted:because none of this was designed with a bad actor on the inside, they thought the election process would keep assholes and monsters at bay because who would vote for an rear end in a top hat monster? What? It absolutely was not. The apparatus was designed by elites (the founding fathers) in a very specific way to make sure they retained control of the electoral process, hence the outsized power of the Senate (originally not even an elected office) and the electoral college (not actually required to vote in the way that their state population does).
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 02:17
|
|
|
cr0y posted:This Rittenhouse trial poo poo is so hosed. I'm sorry I don't have any intelligent or reasonable critique of why it's hosed. It just is. I'm still wondering how his defense can hinge on him acting in self defense when, as far as I understand it, you cannot claim self defense while you are engaging in a crime. Which...he undoubtedly was. Like even if you concede he acted in a manner that would be consistent with self defense if he wasn't committing a crime at that time, he was committing that crime! (Also I don't concede that but whatever) Of course I'm not a lawyer at all so I could easily be wrong, but gently caress this whole situation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 02:27
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:I'm still wondering how his defense can hinge on him acting in self defense when, as far as I understand it, you cannot claim self defense while you are engaging in a crime. Which...he undoubtedly was. Like even if you concede he acted in a manner that would be consistent with self defense if he wasn't committing a crime at that time, he was committing that crime! (Also I don't concede that but whatever) So this is basically the Wisconsin statue about self defense and committing a crime, just FYI. I defer to any Wisconsin lawyers to explain it further. quote:) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 02:40
|
|
|
It's almost as if laws in America are selectively applied depending on your race and wealth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 02:46
|
|
|
That's a super complex definition but I at least understand why he wasn't charged with manslaughter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 03:06
|
|
|
Seems like he still has the right to claim self defense, based on that definition.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 03:37
|
|
|
hobbez posted:Seems like he still has the right to claim self defense, based on that definition. How? He could have tossed his gun aside and given up any pretense of causing gross bodily harm to others but he didn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 03:39
|
|
|
hobbez posted:Seems like he still has the right to claim self defense, based on that definition. Going out of his way by travelling across state, to seek conflict, and then murdering people because you felt threatened in a conflict area, is not self-defense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 03:45
|
|
|
How are u posted:What do you mean by this? Some sort of pro-labor action that would be so, uh, controversial(?) that it would end somebody or multiple people's careers? Yeah I mean somebody/somebodys with the power to do so, within "the system", ramming through meaningful legislative change for the masses, without thought to electoral consequence ie them or their coalition getting reelected. A hail mary / right thing to do type of political play that by and by this thread and optimistically its data has suggested over as many days. It would of course require informed Americans to sell the benefit too. We don't even want to listen to democrats, it's OUR job to sell positive change. This is everybody's responsibility and failure, ultimately.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 03:49
|
|
|
His story is that he went there to provide medical aid. It's obviously bullshit, because there were plenty of field medics at protests all across the country who weren't carrying assault rifles. But "normal" Americans who believe that cities were literally burning to the ground last year will eat it up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 03:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Going out of his way by travelling across state, to seek conflict, and then murdering people because you felt threatened in a conflict area, is not self-defense. I agree that he shouldn't have been out there in the first place and is therefore morally responsible for those deaths; however, based on the legal definition of Wisconsin self defense that was posted, it seems like he is in the legal clear for claiming self defense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2021 03:57
|
|
