Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

Rhesus Pieces posted:

So apparently the new obsession among conservatives is to get Hillary and Obama to say that we're at war with "radical Islam" and not extremists or ISIL or whatever we're actually calling them right now.

Because we can bomb and drone and snoop and deploy special forces all we want but until we blow the holy war dog whistle we're still pulling punches.

They don't want to owe up to their mistakes in Iraq. By their own narrative, ISIS blinked into existence some time after we left Iraq and it's Obummer's fault they came to power.

I've been citing this article all goddamn week on Facebook.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

zoux posted:

Rand Paul told reporters he's readying a bill that would prohibit allowing refugees from as many as 30 countries with "jihadist ties". :thumbsup:

I wonder if Indonesia will end up on the list somehow

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

Amergin posted:

Except the Jews didn't want to strap vests onto themselves and kill civilians in their new homes.

The Jews were frequently targeted by propaganda because of the communist uprising in Munich even before the Nazis were cool.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless
Isn't rejecting refugees a great way to piss off the coalition we have going in the Middle East? France is going to intervene no matter what, but it's not the only country in NATO. Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan are also all now full of them.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

My Imaginary GF posted:

If Obama were serious about fighting terrorism, he'd get Congress to declare war on ISIL and use his war powers to force everything he wants through.

Didn't he try to do that earlier this year and the Republicans said no?

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

KomradeX posted:

The number of people saying that should fix the problem themselves and stay in Syria is depressing. And I can't even form into words why that's a bad idea.

The reality is that any bombing campaign is going to cause collateral damage if you don't do something about the refugees.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

Riosan posted:

What the gently caress is this? No, I get it, it's Trump pandering as usual, but what the gently caress.

"Nuh uh, ISIS can't touch me, I'm in a safe zone." Does that safety also extend to drone strikes? This is giving me a headache.

Erdogan originally wanted a safe zone in Syria, which it turns out was impossible to defend since we have no boots on the ground there.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

My Imaginary GF posted:

It seems as if Obama isn't good at flag-waving and chest-beating. Perhaps its time for someone in office who is.


- Ramping up to a declaration of war against ISIL, ala 2003


#2 was entirely the fault of the GOP and AUMF.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

Remember, we're not allowed to discuss the causes of terrorism.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

quote:

Lieber and Press have documented this nicely. Indeed, using a Pentagon computer model, they estimated that a U.S. counterforce strike against China’s ICBM silos using high-yield weapons detonated at ground blast would still kill anywhere between 3-4 million people. Using low-yield weapons and airbursts, this figure drops to as little as 700 fatalities!

This makes using nuclear weapons thinkable for the first time since the 1940s. The B61-12 only encourages this trend further.

We can get into a nuclear exchange with China and only kill 700 people!

- an idiot

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless
Why are the independent voters voting either far left or right in the polls?

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

evilweasel posted:

It's more that Germany surrendered after its army was defeated in the field, but before the public knew that their army was defeated in the field. We were way harsher in the aftermath of WWII but nobody, anywhere, had the slightest doubt that Germany got beaten completely because it was conquered before it surrendered. But in WWI, they surrendered once the army was beaten but before Germany was occupied, so the public faced years of war and then were suddenly told one day they lost, despite being told everything was going swimmingly and that all of the German armies were still on foreign territory.

This is nonsense. The Treaty of Versailles demanded that reparations be paid in foreign currency so that Germany had to take out loans or move cash out out of currency every time they paid up. Germany got none of this after WW2, and even got a load of debt forgiveness in the 1950s.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless
Krugmandefendingmalthusianecenomics.txt

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

evilweasel posted:

It is entirely, 100%, correct. Reparations as the driving force behind WWII was mostly nonsense: Germany could have paid up, but was politically unable to do so because the post-war settlement was regarded as illegitimate by the Germans who believed they'd agreed to an honorable truce, not a surrender.

After WWII Germany was a smoking wreck and was divided half a decade and not even formally sovereign until the 90's.

You couldn't be any more wrong about this. t don't how you got "Germans could have paid up but were politically unable to do so" from "defaulting on payments". They were required to give exports as part of reparations and their factories simply couldn't keep up. The second they did default, Allied powers marched in and started seizing national assets. A lot of countries at the time were feeling a financial crunch and were attempting to offload their burdens on Germany. There as passive resistance in the end, but only after the Allies got heavy handed. Remember, the Weimar government accepted the Dawes plan condition of foreign supervision of the Reichsbank.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

fishmech posted:

Germany got occupation and partitioning, with extensive ongoing foreign government influence in its politics til the 90s, and permanent loss of 25% of its pre-Hitler territory.

That's actually a good deal more severe than what happened after WWI.

The United States was willing to float the German economy because of the Cold War, though. Germany was already feeling the shock on its economy before the Great Depression took off, but post WW2 Germany was able to reduce its debt, not give reparations in terms of exports, not get its national assets seized, and still have money left over for the insanely expensive reunification with East Germany.

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

Monkey Fracas posted:

That's how I've always seen his campaign as well- never really though he would win but he's definitely helping keep Hillary honest.

Or twitter

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

computer parts posted:

Which elections have been "foreign policy focused"?

1952 elections

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless
Also the second to last of FDR's re-election campaigns

e: wrong one

Dead Cosmonaut fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Nov 23, 2015

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless
being white is a privilege

owning a gun is also a privilege

being white and owning a gun a double privilege

but being black and owning a gun is just one privilege not two

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

Joementum posted:


"I have no desire to see us elect our own Margaret Thatcher." :stare:

:wow:

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless

zoux posted:



Also, almost half of all Americans think racism is "a big problem", which is actually way more than usual.


Maybe if they think "racism against whites" is a problem

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless
The GOP primary is, at the moment, a contest of who can pander to their constituents' increasingly insane views the most using racism, xenophobia, and economic conservatism. They have about as much direction and coherence as a chicken with its head cut off.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dead Cosmonaut
Nov 14, 2015

by FactsAreUseless
"middle of the pack in the polls"

heh

  • Locked thread