EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 1741
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 19 2015 02:43 oneofthem wrote: kwisatch covered the politics of the aiib pretty well so im only criticizing the notion that 'the world doesnt trust the us economy or the dollar.' happy to talk about why i think this move on the part of europe isnt as consequentially pro-china as it looks tho. Well, there's a world of difference between trusting the American dollar enough to do business with you, and trusting you enough to shirk other markets and nations just because that's what you want. Investing in China isn't about running away from US trade, it's about removing over-reliance on the US and increasing the export market. But honestly, I'm still trying to figure out of this discussion thread is a joke topic or something. Do people honestly believe that the international market and trade agreements are actually determined by how nice the US President gets along with a country? | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
instead of 'free market' the competition for infrastructure deals in developing nations is often a matter of politics. the europeans just want to get into the lucrative business of getting deals with china and its partners. this institution may undercut the leverage the world bank etc have as sources of funding, and thus the standards and rules backed by that leverage. such as standards of corruption, labor rights, and environmental standards. but this is limited to the developing world. in terms of "europe leaving the U.S. sphere to get closer to China" this deal is far far from that. it's just europeans wanting more business opportunities not some sort of geopolitical hug. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 19 2015 03:00 oneofthem wrote: the basic problem with talking about how obama damaged the israeli relationship is that israel has no leverage to complain or antagonize not even the U.S. but the democrat party. it will be a grave threat for the future of israel if this argument escalates and makes israel a partisan issue. It's not that simple. Israel's current enjoyment of American subsidies and goodwill does not mean that it is a slave to American interests. In fact, given the strength of the Israeli lobby in the US, an argument can be made that the US foreign policy apparatus is indentured (to a degree) to Israeli interests. Accordingly, Israeli good will is more important than you're making it out to be. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 19 2015 03:52 xDaunt wrote: It's not that simple. Israel's current enjoyment of American subsidies and goodwill does not mean that it is a slave to American interests. In fact, given the strength of the Israeli lobby in the US, an argument can be made that the US foreign policy apparatus is indentured (to a degree) to Israeli interests. Accordingly, Israeli good will is more important than you're making it out to be. using the strength of the israeli lobby here is only to support the notion that departure from supporting israel will be costly for democrats politically, and it is. but, make no mistake israeli is utterly reliant on the u.s. and we have not much to gain for this toil. it is a very high risk move on netanyahu's part to antagonize obama and democrats. israel's dependence on the u.s. and its 'rebellious' behavior are not inconsistent facts. it has to do with both a lack of will on the part of the U.S. to rein in israel (with help of the lobby) and also israeli's pretty dire security situation and internal politics. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 19 2015 03:48 oneofthem wrote: it's not really about removing yourself from U.S. influence tho. instead of 'free market' the competition for infrastructure deals in developing nations is often a matter of politics. the europeans just want to get into the lucrative business of getting deals with china and its partners. this institution may undercut the leverage the world bank etc have as sources of funding, and thus the standards and rules backed by that leverage. such as standards of corruption, labor rights, and environmental standards. but this is limited to the developing world. in terms of "europe leaving the U.S. sphere to get closer to China" this deal is far far from that. it's just europeans wanting more business opportunities not some sort of geopolitical hug. I have a feeling you didn't actually read my posts... I make two posts about how nations are turning to China for trade opportunities and new markets...and you tell me it's not about politics, it's about business. Yes...? | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it's about removing over-reliance on the US and increasing the export market this bank is not a trade agreement. it's a fund for infrastructure financing. also this, there's a world of difference between trusting the American dollar enough to do business with you, and trusting you enough to shirk other markets and nations just because that's what you want some of you guys are portraying this as a choice between trusting the u.s. system and the china led system. but european commitment to the AIIB doesn't signal trust, it signals want of business. so it really is not appropriate to raise the idea that this move is signaling lack of trust in the U.S. whatsoever. as long as you are not raising that point i have no objections. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 19 2015 04:00 oneofthem wrote: it's because you said this bank is not a trade agreement. it's a fund for infrastructure financing. also this, some of you guys are portraying this as a choice between trusting the u.s. system and the china led system. but european commitment to the AIIB doesn't signal trust, it signals want of business. so it really is not appropriate to raise the idea that this move is signaling lack of trust in the U.S. whatsoever. as long as you are not raising that point i have no objections. I don't really get why you're even trying to force it to be a dichotomy. It's not about one or the other, it's about dealing with both. And a lot more, if those opportunities arise. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
by the by, this AIIB could either stay in the business of infrastructure lending or be expanded to rival the world bank and IMF in more areas. it's a pretty neat opportunity for china given the state of american politics. | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On March 19 2015 02:02 xDaunt wrote: And because we're on the topic of botched international relations, Netanyahu's reelection guarantees that Israeli-American relations are going to be in the shitter for the next two years. Obama did everything he could to get the opposition elected and failed. I doubt that fact will be forgotten. Kiss goodbye any prayer of Israeli cooperation on anything that the US might want in the near future. Yeah, but Netanyahu's kinda a douche. So there's that. Kinda curious how we react. He's said "fuck negotiations;" will we really keep vetoing the PA's diplomatic efforts internationally because they need to wait on negotiations? I mean, I know we will, but the hypocrisy will be palpable, and it will lose Israel more goodwill among the young in the US. Netanyahu feels like an agent sent back in time to destroy everything Israel is and stands for. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18442 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24354 Posts
On March 19 2015 06:10 Yoav wrote: Yeah, but Netanyahu's kinda a douche. So there's that. Kinda curious how we react. He's said "fuck negotiations;" will we really keep vetoing the PA's diplomatic efforts internationally because they need to wait on negotiations? I mean, I know we will, but the hypocrisy will be palpable, and it will lose Israel more goodwill among the young in the US. Netanyahu feels like an agent sent back in time to destroy everything Israel is and stands for. I find people under 30ish who don't identify as republican either don't have a strong position on Israel one way or the other or they are anti-Israel (oppression, racism, etc...). I personally haven't met any non-republicans under 30 who are pro-Israel with any zeal. Hell, I'd venture to guess somewhere around 30% of people under 30 couldn't point to Israel on a map. Lol Looked it up and for 18-24 year old people it's actually a lot worse than I thought....(It is from 2006 but I doubt much has changed) Seventy-five percent were unable to locate Israel on a map of the Middle East. That's not even on a globe that's just on a map of the Middle East... If Israel wants to continue relations with the US they are going to have to do something to get young people on their side otherwise 20 years from now Israel simply wont have the support they currently do (even under Obama). Source | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
About 11 percent of young citizens of the U.S. couldn't even locate the U.S. on a map. The Pacific Ocean's location was a mystery to 29 percent; Japan, to 58 percent; France, to 65 percent; and the United Kingdom, to 69 percent. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/11/1126_021120_TVGeoRoperSurvey.html | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24354 Posts
On March 19 2015 06:28 dAPhREAk wrote: Americans are notorious for not being able to locate things on a map. We really are retards. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/11/1126_021120_TVGeoRoperSurvey.html You would think we were less apt to go to war with countries if we can't even find them on the map, but no. Somehow it's easier to send thousands to die or be permanently maimed than it is to teach the people of the US where we are sending them. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
Even for U.S. geography, the survey results are just as dismal. Half could not find New York State on a map of the United States. A third of the respondents could not find Louisiana, and 48 percent couldn't locate Mississippi on a map of the United States, even though Hurricane Katrina put these southeastern states in the spotlight in 2005. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/0502_060502_geography_2.html | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
 | ||
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
Not being able to locate the Pacific Ocean or the US, however, is miraculous. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 19 2015 06:38 dAPhREAk wrote: omg america. wtf. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/0502_060502_geography_2.html Clearly we're not paying teachers enough. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18442 Posts
EDIT: pulled up a blank state map and tried. I got them right (and yeah, you're just going to have to believe me on that). Also, when actually looking at the map I realized how wrong it was to think I could mix up Louisiana and Georgia) | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
"This is not an easy morning for us and for those who believe in our way. We will lead the fight, together with our partners in Knesset, for the values believe in. We will fight on behalf of the citizens of Israel for social justice, diplomatic horizon, equality and democracy in hope that we can maintain a just, safe Jewish and democratic state. We thank from the bottom of our heart to all those who believe in us and in our way." We've got enough of that mealy-mouthed social justice and equality talk in the West from our leaders. It only ends in miscarriage of justice and equality in mediocrity or misery. | ||
| ||
