| 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. | ||
|
whatisthisasheep
624 Posts
On July 24 2015 14:38 GreenHorizons wrote: Speaking of terrorism (except in this country) there was yet another mass shooting (not to be confused with the one in court). Source Most likely just a copycat who has been watching the trial obsessively and wants to have his 15 seconds of fame | ||
|
Doraemon
Australia14949 Posts
On July 24 2015 14:38 GreenHorizons wrote: Speaking of terrorism (except in this country) there was yet another mass shooting (not to be confused with the one in court). Source sad that it feels pretty routine now | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On July 24 2015 14:43 lastpuritan wrote: I personally think there is no difference between Iran and Israel having nukes. It is always fun to watch every country on the table has those warheads except Iran. No man can convince me that any of those countries will never use these "tools" against Iran or any enemy, but even if they use it, we will be inclined to believe it was the inevitable choice. I think the difference is that Israel has no way to deliver nukes to its enemies while having plausible deniability. That Hamas/Hezzbola/Al Qaeda/etc (and the difficulty for Western intelligence to determine which caused the attack) might have access to a black market nuke means that the West+Israel is consistently vulnerable to an anonymous attack. The terrorist connections, IMO, are a bigger priority than nuclear capabilities. Particularly with regards to Israel, because I have noticed a huge surge in Antisemitism in Europe. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
HELENA, Mont. (AP) — Firefighters on Thursday braced for a fresh run by a wildfire that sent tourists fleeing from hotels and campgrounds in Montana's Glacier National Park, while a blaze threatening hundreds of homes in Northern California shot flames 100 feet in the air. Both states are ravaged by drought, and rising temperatures and strengthening winds greeted newly arrived crews taking aim at the blaze in the Northern Rocky Mountains. It has burned more than 6 square miles along the eastern side of the Montana park during prime tourist season, when lodges and inns have been booked for months. Some visitors packed up and left the region immediately after seeing smoke rising above ridge tops, while others diverted to different parts of the park. Officials said only a small part of Glacier's 1,718 square miles have been closed by the fire, and most of its top attractions on the east and west sides are still open. The fire ignited Tuesday and then swept along ridges near the scenic Going-to-the-Sun Road, the park's most popular roadway, heading toward the small community of St. Mary on the park's eastern boundary. Source | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On July 24 2015 12:41 Mercy13 wrote: Can you provide a link to a non-proliferation expert who thinks the deal is bad? I haven't been able to find a single one. That's because the people who are actually knowledgeable on the issue know it's a good deal, contrary to the people who have zero clue about non-proliferation and oppose the deal for ideological reasons. This article by non-proliferation expert Jeffrey Lewis sums it up pretty well. Note that he was initially skeptical the U.S. would reach a good deal with Iran, but the facts are there. It is a good deal. There is nothing in the agreement that makes it easier for Iran to get a nuclear weapon, and everything in it makes it harder for them to get one. It is unambiguously an improvement compared to the current situation with sanctions, whatever the measure you want to use. See also this article and this overview of experts' opinions. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
As immigration and incarceration issues become central to the 2016 presidential campaign, lobbyists for two major prison companies are serving as top fundraisers for Hillary Clinton. Corrections Corporation of America and the Geo Group could both see their fortunes turning if there are fewer people to lock up in the future. Last week, Clinton and other candidates revealed a number of lobbyists who are serving as “bundlers” for their campaigns. Bundlers collect contributions on behalf of a campaign, and are often rewarded with special favors, such as access to the candidate. Richard Sullivan, of the lobbying firm Capitol Counsel, is a bundler for the Clinton campaign, bringing in $44,859 in contributions in a few short months. Sullivan is also a registered lobbyist for the Geo Group, a company that operates a number of jails, including immigrant detention centers, for profit. As we reported yesterday, fully five Clinton bundlers work for the lobbying and law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld. Corrections Corporation of America, the largest private prison company in America, paid Akin Gump $240,000 in lobbying fees last year. The firm also serves as a law firm for the prison giant, representing the company in court. Akin Gump lobbyist and Clinton bundler Brian Popper disclosed that he previously helped CCA defeat efforts to compel private prisons to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests. Source | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18292 Posts
On July 24 2015 13:39 LuckyFool wrote: Most of the US allies in the middle east thinks the deal is bad. The Saudi's think it's bad, even the extreme left of Israel thinks the deal is bad. You don't see the left in Israel agreeing with Netanyahu very often. My opinion; Lifting sanctions on Iran is a huge mistake. Iran getting $150 billion in mostly upfront sanctions relief is a colossal mistake. The short term destabilization that we could be enabling by lifting sanctions is more dangerous than the possibility Iran might or might not be on the way to a nuke. Anyone who thinks this money is going to be used primarily for education and economic purposes ought to study up on the current Iranian regime. I'm not saying all of Iran is corrupt, but some of the guys at the top for the past few decades are corrupt to the core, there is no room for someone who is openly supporting and funding terrorism. You'd have to be incredibly naive to think a guy like Ali Khamenei is going to stop preaching death to America now because of this deal. Why we would want to invite guys like that back into the community of nations makes no sense to me. Obama has been talking about getting a deal like this done before his presidency so clearly it was on his agenda of trademark things to get done. There could very well be alternative motives behind the deal that we'll never know either. But on the surface the deal looks really bad, filled with loopholes, ways for Iran to get out, side deals and a bunch of random convoluted details like having to give 2+ weeks notice before inspecting known enrichment sites. These details are going to cause major issues in congress when they eventually get to voting on it. I don't know if it was linked previously but I highly recommend anyone who is interested, to read through the actual deal itself. Some of the clauses in it are beyond laughable in my opinion. Paragraph 36 literally gives Iran a way out of the deal at any time, all they have to do is file a complaint to the joint commission, reject any possible resolution, and are free to walk away from the deal IN WHOLE. The US doesn't even get anything out of this other than hopes and dreams Iran will clean up their act. I honestly hope they do but we haven't seen any change in over 30 years now. Thinking the deal is bad from an ideological standpoint is different from thinking the deal is bad from a non-proliferation standpoint, and for some reason, people (particularly politicians opposing the deal) think it is okay to conflate the two. You can think the deal is good from a non-proliferation standpoint and still think the deal is bad, because it allows Iran to continue dicking around, and expanding their influence, in the middle-east, by funding Hezbollah (and the Syrian regime), "helping" Iraq fight ISIS and whatever the fuck they are doing in Yemen or elsewhere. However, it is quite clear that the sanctions weren't stopping Iran from doing any of that anywah, so /shrug. From a non-proliferation standpoint, all experts think it is a good deal. Israel, Saudi Arabia and other allies in the M.E. think it's a bad deal because they are rabidly opposed to anything that might help Iran in the long term (note, not help Iran get a bomb, but help Iran in general). | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
NEW YORK (AP) — Anthem is buying rival Cigna for $48 billion in a deal that would create the nation's largest health insurer by enrollment, covering about 53 million U.S patients. In just three weeks, starting with Aetna's $35 billion bid for Humana Inc. on July 3, the landscape of U.S. health care has been altered in a buyout frenzy that could transform five massive U.S. health companies into just three, including UnitedHealth Group. Companies that provide coverage are adjusting to the national health care overhaul and must contend with slow growth in employer-sponsored health insurance, a massive chunk of the health care market. The deal announced Friday is valued at $54.2 billion including debt. Shareholders of Cigna, based in Bloomfield, Connecticut, will receive $103.40 per share in cash and 0.5152 shares of Anthem stock for each of their shares. The companies put the total value at $188 per share. Industry analysts have pointed out several advantages to an industry consolidation. A larger insurer can gain more leverage and negotiating power to use in hashing out rates with care providers. However, the two mega deals announced this month are going to be scrutinized heavily by regulators, who want to ensure that they do not gain so much power that they can dominate the market. The impact these big acquisitions have on consumers likely won't be felt for at least a year, because insurers have already finalized most of their plans for coverage that starts in January. A combination may lead to fewer choices and some price changes for consumers, depending on where they live and who already is in their market. Source | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
| ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
| ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
On July 24 2015 13:39 LuckyFool wrote: Most of the US allies in the middle east thinks the deal is bad. The Saudi's think it's bad, even the extreme left of Israel thinks the deal is bad. You don't see the left in Israel agreeing with Netanyahu very often. My opinion; Lifting sanctions on Iran is a huge mistake. Iran getting $150 billion in mostly upfront sanctions relief is a colossal mistake. The short term destabilization that we could be enabling by lifting sanctions is more dangerous than the possibility Iran might or might not be on the way to a nuke. Anyone who thinks this money is going to be used primarily for education and economic purposes ought to study up on the current Iranian regime. I'm not saying all of Iran is corrupt, but some of the guys at the top for the past few decades are corrupt to the core, there is no room for someone who is openly supporting and funding terrorism. You'd have to be incredibly naive to think a guy like Ali Khamenei is going to stop preaching death to America now because of this deal. Why we would want to invite guys like that back into the community of nations makes no sense to me. Obama has been talking about getting a deal like this done before his presidency so clearly it was on his agenda of trademark things to get done. There could very well be alternative motives behind the deal that we'll never know either. But on the surface the deal looks really bad, filled with loopholes, ways for Iran to get out, side deals and a bunch of random convoluted details like having to give 2+ weeks notice before inspecting known enrichment sites. These details are going to cause major issues in congress when they eventually get to voting on it. I don't know if it was linked previously but I highly recommend anyone who is interested, to read through the actual deal itself. Some of the clauses in it are beyond laughable in my opinion. Paragraph 36 literally gives Iran a way out of the deal at any time, all they have to do is file a complaint to the joint commission, reject any possible resolution, and are free to walk away from the deal IN WHOLE. The US doesn't even get anything out of this other than hopes and dreams Iran will clean up their act. I honestly hope they do but we haven't seen any change in over 30 years now. And paragraph 37 says that if they walkaway the sanctions are reimposed in their entirety, unless the security counsel unanimously votes to keep them off... I don't see the problem here. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Its the Onion, but this its super relevant: http://www.theonion.com/article/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-36131 Just remember, there is nothing we could have done. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Next up: The efforts in the war on terror and how we will stop them from getting the weapons they need to engage in terrorism. Until then, break out your mass shooting bingo card. You get White, loner and violent/troubled past for free. | ||
|
whatisthisasheep
624 Posts
On July 24 2015 21:31 heliusx wrote: Just confirmed john Houser is the shooter. "drifter from Alabama who arrived in Lafayette in early July 2015.". What a peice of shit. Sounds like someone watched a little to much Rambo | ||
|
always_winter
United States195 Posts
A non-proliferation standpoint is an ideological standpoint. Enlisting labels as a source of discourse is entirely counterproductive. Non-proliferation is an ideology. It's simply yours. Imagining the deal from a non-proliferation standpoint relies on a series of assumptions, the first of which is that Iran isn't within reach of a developmental breakthrough already. No one outside of Iran knows the current stage of the program; Iran could already be nuclear. It's only logical Iran would keep that hand close to the chest. Another is the belief Iran's nuclear ambitions could possibly be limited to energy, an astronomically naïve insinuation which ironically exhibits an incredibly poor understanding of Middle Eastern politics and the incredibly complex dynamism between increasingly non-rational state actors. A child could understand the concept of non-proliferation; similarly a child could be persuaded to view the entire world order through a single lens. That's dangerous. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On July 24 2015 21:42 Mercy13 wrote: And paragraph 37 says that if they walkaway the sanctions are reimposed in their entirety, unless the security counsel unanimously votes to keep them off... I don't see the problem here. And also, don't forget that the Iranian people will be absolutely livid if the sanctions are snapped back.When they riot, they'll make the Green Revolution look like a minor student protest. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
An extraordinary scene unfolded on the Senate floor Friday as Republican Sen. Ted Cruz bluntly accused Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of lying and said he's running the Senate like his Democratic predecessor. The charges from the Texas senator and GOP presidential candidate were a rare departure from the Senate's usual staid decorum, even for a politician famous for his fiery speeches. Source  | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
GSL
Replay Cast
GSL
WardiTV Spring Champion…
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
