|
Srice posted:Yeah absolutely. A lot of people (and very importantly, a lot of the media) really buy into the narrative of tough people making tough decisions. And that if those tough decisions result in truly heinous crimes, its okay because you agonized over it a bit. Also objectively awful outcomes are acceptable if you professed to have good intentions. Bishyaler fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Mar 25, 2022 |
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 04:36 |
|
|
Rochallor posted:Adams is so intensely devoted to business while at the same time being just a complete fuckin weirdo, there is no way this guy doesn't end up President and there's a good chance he's the one we abolish the 22nd Amendment for. President Adams windsurfing through the ruins of Miami to raise money for his VP's kidney operation. I feel like this is a better model of Adams's trajectory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 01:29
|
|
|
Srice posted:In light of Madeleine Albright dying I think it's good to remember that in the past she fully acknowledged that sanctions on Iraq killed hundreds of thousands and said it was worth it. I suppose any country that willfully invades another country on the basis of a self-serving pack of lies deserves crippling sanctions, even if those sanctions mostly lead to the immiseration of millions who had no part or choice in that decision whatsoever. Perhaps even implement this policy retroactively. Let's say any country that did so in the past 20 years. Hell, add a multiplier if that invasion led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands and destabilized a region of the world to really stick it to them. Is that more or less sociopathic than playing economic and militaristic chess with eastern European countries filled with tens of millions of people for little more than rubbing in just how much you won the cold war? If only there were any other options. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 01:50
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:I honestly think to the average American the difference really is that she said it was a hard choice but worth it. If she had said "gently caress them kids" we would know it was a genocide but we just can't see into her heart so we need to give her the benefit of the doubt. I don't think the average American knows who she is, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 02:15
|
|
|
So nothing too big here Just the wife of a supreme court justice going all in on the January 6 insurrection wanting to overthrow our government. As one does https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/24/politics/ginni-thomas-mark-meadows-text-messages/index.html quote:The House Select Committee investigating the January 6 riot has in its possession more than two dozen text messages, 29 in total, between former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, a conservative activist and the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, according to multiple sources familiar with the messages. Read the whole thing seriously. Also, if I remember right, there was a case that came before the court that she was involved in about a decade ago where Thomas should have recused himself but didn't. Might have been the ACA but I honestly don't remember
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 02:24
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:So nothing too big here Jesus. I expected it to be more ... I don't know politically savvy? It's literally just her spouting the poisoned brain poo poo. The GOP is really just honest to god dumb as gently caress from the top down.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 02:32
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:And that if those tough decisions result in truly heinous crimes, its okay because you agonized over it a bit. Also objectively awful outcomes are acceptable if you professed to have good intentions. I found this record of hearings about US sanctions on South African when I was posting earlier. It looks like one of the arguments against imposing sanctions was that people could starve as a result. The stance from some people appears to be that sanctions are unjustifiable because of the impact on innocent people, and you're mocking "tough decisions" on sanctions today. But looking at a situation in the past, with the benefit of hindsight, imposing sanctions on South Africa seems like an obviously good thing to do. So what position do you take? And if sanctions are sometimes appropriate, why are they not appropriate against Russia today?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 02:33
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:So nothing too big here Yep that was about ACA. Thomas also should have recused himself on this one too. https://twitter.com/JaneMayerNYer/status/1507118729154420739
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 02:51
|
|
|
Ginni Thomas isn't really a 'threat to the Supreme Court' when they are perfectly willing to take up cases that are perfectly tailored to allow them to strike down precedent whether she is involved or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 02:56
|
|
|
hobotrashcanfires posted:I suppose any country that willfully invades another country on the basis of a self-serving pack of lies deserves crippling sanctions, even if those sanctions mostly lead to the immiseration of millions who had no part or choice in that decision whatsoever. feel like maybe carefully dancing around the topic of the ukraine war should be taken to the ukraine war thread rather than playing Not Touching You
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 03:28
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Ginni Thomas isn't really a 'threat to the Supreme Court' when they are perfectly willing to take up cases that are perfectly tailored to allow them to strike down precedent whether she is involved or not. She's a fascist fundie loving chud who is puppet master for a loving supreme court justice and should be watched at all times.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:I found this record of hearings about US sanctions on South African when I was posting earlier. It looks like one of the arguments against imposing sanctions was that people could starve as a result. We're starving Afghanistan and your main upset about it is that America isn't perceived as the heroes. You've misunderstood this argument multiple times as people defending Russia and they're taking a far far far more complicated stance than that. We don't need to look at South Africa because we have sanctions right now that are starving Afghanistan. And mocking tough decisions is mocking Albright saying that the cost of all those dead Iraq children was worth it. Was it? Gumball Gumption fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Mar 25, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
Keyser_Soze posted:She's a fascist fundie loving chud who is puppet master for a loving supreme court justice and should be watched at all times. Oh right, so a black man who made it to the SUPREME COURT couldn't be making his own decisions, there must still be a white person pulling his strings???
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 03:52
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Oh right, so a black man who made it to the SUPREME COURT couldn't be making his own decisions, there must still be a white person pulling his strings??? The ultra hot take of 'dude does what his wife tells him'
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:02
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:The ultra hot take of 'dude does what his wife tells him' I was considering adding (please do not take this seriously) to the end of my post but I thought nah, I'll give people here some credit Now all I can think is that "henpecked SCOTUS judge trying to justify decisions made by his overbearing wife" sounds like the premise of an early 2000s sitcom
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:08
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Oh right, so a black man who made it to the SUPREME COURT couldn't be making his own decisions, there must still be a white person pulling his strings??? Who came close to even implying anything like this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:10
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Oh right, so a black man who made it to the SUPREME COURT couldn't be making his own decisions, there must still be a white person pulling his strings??? there's not a single supreme court justice, including the ones i like, who has a more consistent jurisprudential philosophy than clarence thomas his philosophy is completely bugfuck nuts and if we had five clarences thomas it would lead to the immediate collapse of society, but he stands by his completely insane principles
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:18
|
|
|
what i'm saying is, this is a man who when presented with "but if we followed your principles your marriage would have been illegal" responds with "yeah, so?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:22
|
|
|
People used to say that Thomas was Scalia's puppet, and it was racist then. You can hate Thomas and his wife both for a ton of valid reasons and don't need to do weird takes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:23
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:The ultra hot take of 'dude does what his wife tells him' Have you seen how much deplorable poo poo she has been involved in? All of you completely ignore the fundie factor as well, these people are loving insane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:23
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:there's not a single supreme court justice, including the ones i like, who has a more consistent jurisprudential philosophy than clarence thomas Thomas has been an exception in this, and a big Conservative project is getting more people like him, people who are so deeply invested in lovely world views, they won't move left. Outside of Gorsuch's libertarian streak that can be a force of good, they have mostly been successful in that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:26
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:what i'm saying is, this is a man who when presented with "but if we followed your principles your marriage would have been illegal" responds with "yeah, so?" I had forgotten about this completely. He's so cool
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:26
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:feel like maybe carefully dancing around the topic of the ukraine war should be taken to the ukraine war thread rather than playing Not Touching You My apologies. I was, too subtly I suppose, referencing the current events presently being enacted by the United States upon other parts of the world which will potentially have great and lasting impact both domestically and internationally. Was that really dancing too close to the United States' heavy involvement historically and presently as it relates to war in Ukraine and broad sanctions upon the entire country of Russia for its unjust invasion? Was it too glib a suggestion that the US deserves equally draconian sanctions upon it's populace for it's far more nonsensically bellicose invasion of Iraq and how it led to the death and displacement of millions and a region that remains massively destabilized to this day? Is it also too near out of bounds to refer to the United States' very current sanctions against Afghanistan which were already likely before present instability to lead to a famine and mass death? Must we also pretend it's present circumstances weren't directly a result of cynically pouring weapons and efforts to radicalize the populace to fight Russia in a proxy war where we pretended to give a poo poo about freedom and their right of self-determination before turning around and brutally occupying them for 20 years and then abruptly ejecting from our failed colonial project, stealing their national reserves and again, sanctioning them for our troubles? Is it too much to question that the same powers, the same foreign policy establishment, and to our great detriment many of the same individuals responsible for the above remain in charge of US policy and the current events thereof today, whether in regards to Ukraine, Russia, Afghanistan, or dare I say, the US? Somehow I doubt the Ukraine war thread you suggest is actually the place for nor would welcome such a discussion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 04:36
|
|
|
philadelphia will never not be Full Philadelphia lmao https://twitter.com/DenisonBe/status/1507030071340634116
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 05:08
|
|
|
Doctor Teeth posted:philadelphia will never not be Full Philadelphia lmao Philly fans will hurl batteries at passing MiGs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 05:13
|
|
|
Doctor Teeth posted:philadelphia will never not be Full Philadelphia lmao The Gang Goes to Kyiv.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 05:20
|
|
|
When you boil it down that's what a no fly zone is. You take some chalk and encircle an area of any size or shape and tell people hey- you can't fly there. Russian pilots will turn around when they reach the edge of the chalk as it's been clearly delineated as a place where you cannot fly. mistakes do happen in which case enforcement mechanism is tracking all the planes that cross over that line and sending letters saying guys- not sure if you knew this but that area you just flew into is a no fly zone. Imagine the embarassment! Thats why they are seen as potentially an escalation. If we were to embarass the russian air force like that on the national stage we would be courting ww3. Not to mention if the russians were to reapond by drawing a no fly zone over the continental US they could wreak havoc on air domestic air travel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 05:28
|
|
|
Another Republican rep in trouble with the law https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1507169159196590088?s=21 You may remember that he got really mad when this happened https://twitter.com/numbersmuncher/status/1507198598508953600?s=21&t=M01qgquLa3a44BXifRYPsw
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 05:47
|
|
|
Taking illegal donations to use in your political campaign is too boring for a real scandal now. Campaign finance scandals will never top Duncan "The Vaping Congressman" Hunter spending donor money on 3k worth of Steam games and his wife letting him take his mistress to lunch if he gives her shopping money from the campaign. If you are going to break campaign finance law, then do it on something funny and don't just plow it back into your campaign.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 05:54
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:I found this record of hearings about US sanctions on South African when I was posting earlier. It looks like one of the arguments against imposing sanctions was that people could starve as a result. The sanctions on South Africa to end apartheid might be one of the only arguable success stories for sanctions. I say arguable because there have been experts who argue the exact opposite. The problem with sanctions is they usually end up hurting marginalized people with no power in the decision making for actions which triggered the sanctions. Like Iraq. And Afghanistan. If the argument is that its acceptable to murder a bunch of civilians to trigger regime change, then how are you any better than the regime? And that's if the sanctions were successful, which they overwhelmingly aren't. So no, broad sanctions aren't ethical in any situation, Russia included.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 06:18
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Philly fans will hurl batteries at passing MiGs. no shortage of aa batteries in philadelphia
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 06:19
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:The sanctions on South Africa to end apartheid might be one of the only arguable success stories for sanctions. I say arguable because there have been experts who argue the exact opposite. The problem with sanctions is they usually end up hurting marginalized people with no power in the decision making for actions which triggered the sanctions. Like Iraq. And Afghanistan. And even then, South Africa was a very different story and different context.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 06:34
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:We're starving Afghanistan and your main upset about it is that America isn't perceived as the heroes. Except I wasn't saying this. If you can't or won't engage with what I'm actually saying, why bother at all? Bishyaler posted:The sanctions on South Africa to end apartheid might be one of the only arguable success stories for sanctions. I say arguable because there have been experts who argue the exact opposite. The problem with sanctions is they usually end up hurting marginalized people with no power in the decision making for actions which triggered the sanctions. Like Iraq. And Afghanistan. I'd be really interested in reading what the experts who think South African sanctions were a mistake have to say. To your second paragraph: I think it's situational, and there isn't a single clear answer. That's why I object to the "all sanctions are bad" take. DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 06:41 on Mar 25, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 06:38
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:I found this record of hearings about US sanctions on South African when I was posting earlier. It looks like one of the arguments against imposing sanctions was that people could starve as a result. I also read through that record and I'm not really sure what it applies to here. It appears to be a transcript of Toby Roth arguing that sanctions should be lifted from South Africa because of the damage it was doing to the American economy too, black South Africans did not want the sanctions, and they were leading to starvation. But he's also arguing for sanctions against Soviet backed Ethiopia because of a famine that he claims is caused by food hoarding from the government I don't know enough about his record/politics since we're going back to 1985ish but the contradiction there is odd. Raise sanctions on a starving country to place them on a starving country to stop two famines. Also you are assuming they work at all. A lot of research and time has been spent on that question and it's not very clear. Were sanctions necessary in South Africa? Was regime change possible without them? Also South Africa if anything is an exception to the rule in that it was a US ally who wanted to trade with us. Gumball Gumption fucked around with this message at 07:11 on Mar 25, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 07:06
|
|
|
It's strange how often I find myself reposting this:punk rebel ecks posted:Someone linked me this paper on the subject earlier. South African sanctions is becoming the new Goodwin's Law.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 07:35
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:So at this point anti-vaxxers have pretty much won because the economy needs to be open again. It's so Kyrie Irving can play home games. It's actually for the Yankees, Kyrie just gets to reap the benefits. I seem to recall Adams very recently giving Kyrie the "Gee I'd love to see you play, but it wouldn't send a good message to everyone else" treatment. No one NY really gives a poo poo about the Nets, but I imagine as a politician in NY, you don't want to be perceived as the reason the Yankees suck for the first time in 30 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 07:48
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:The sanctions on South Africa to end apartheid might be one of the only arguable success stories for sanctions. I say arguable because there have been experts who argue the exact opposite. The problem with sanctions is they usually end up hurting marginalized people with no power in the decision making for actions which triggered the sanctions. Like Iraq. And Afghanistan. I think that it's important to consider that every systemic problem to exist has this conundrum. It is the nature of systems to crush marginalized people, and when pressed to change or when they begin falling apart, those same systems crush marginalized people harder. It is almost cliche at this point to say "we can't make big sweeping changes like this because it'll hurt those at the bottom the most." But the fact of the matter is, that's the nature of the system as it was designed, those at the bottom are required to shoulder the burden the most, regardless of the size or source of that burden, and so pointing to that as a reason not to take action is essentially holding us in place from fear of inventing something that's already there. I don't mean to go to bat for sanctions, specifically, since they are often used imperialistically and to secure capital more resources, but it's rather hard to see South Africa's ending apartheid as a net negative, imo; regardless of the exact means through which it got there. Sometimes harm reduction requires some harm to be done, in lieu of a perfect option.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 08:07
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:I think that it's important to consider that every systemic problem to exist has this conundrum. It is the nature of systems to crush marginalized people, and when pressed to change or when they begin falling apart, those same systems crush marginalized people harder. It is almost cliche at this point to say "we can't make big sweeping changes like this because it'll hurt those at the bottom the most." But the fact of the matter is, that's the nature of the system as it was designed, those at the bottom are required to shoulder the burden the most, regardless of the size or source of that burden, and so pointing to that as a reason not to take action is essentially holding us in place from fear of inventing something that's already there. It... seems like your argument is that it's actually okay if sanctions kill a bunch of the poorest and most vulnerable people in society, because if they didn't, something else would? I must be misunderstanding because that would an absolutely psychotic argument to put forward but I'm honestly unclear on how else to interpret this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 08:46
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Taking illegal donations to use in your political campaign is too boring for a real scandal now. Duncan hunter literally thought his cuckold wife was goi g to take the fall for him and not betray him the first chance she got which… Duncan used an ostensibly official trip to Italy to take his family on a vacation wherein he cheated on his wife and got caught via text messages making GBS threads on the soldiers Duncan hunter went on Fox News and stated when he was in the military in Iraq, they targeted civilians all the time. He was in artillery. Duncan hunter would regularly be close to blackout drunk before noon Duncan hunter was apparently trying to sell fidget spinners for five bucks to anyone in Congress he could and had a giant box of them in his office Duncan hunter has played and written extensive (and honestly generally good) reviews of like every single half life iteration ever released on steam. I love Duncan hunter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 11:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 04:36 |
|
|
some plague rats posted:It... seems like your argument is that it's actually okay if sanctions kill a bunch of the poorest and most vulnerable people in society, because if they didn't, something else would? I must be misunderstanding because that would an absolutely psychotic argument to put forward but I'm honestly unclear on how else to interpret this? The poorest and most vulnerable people suffer in any anti-imperialist effort. There's not a solution to imperialist powers that doesn't somehow kill the poorest and most vulnerable of those societies. A people's war involves killing the enlisted men of an imperialist power. The psycho, the fake anti-imperialist, imo, is the one who believes it is more important that no one die than that imperialism be stopped. And yes, the US should have been sanctioned for invading Iraq- it's the only not-military measure that would've made a difference. Bothering a few rich people wouldn't have been sufficient to shut down supply chains and make it difficult to fight a war. It wasn't, and that was a bad thing, but at least some invader is getting hammered for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 11:46
|
|
