US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4363

On July 21 2016 05:26 Sermokala wrote:
Devils advocate here but isn't ISIS kinda good for the west? keeping the middle east down for more years while the oil runs out?

On July 21 2016 05:28 zlefin wrote:

No, we'd get the oil anyways with or without ISIS. ISIS just means we have to spend more money/lives.

On July 21 2016 05:26 zlefin wrote:
I never said intent has relatively little bearing; there are many factors, and in some cases intent is the most important factor (because other factors have been addressed). What I said was highly germane to the conversation I was having.
We arrived at common ground because I put in a lot of work to be more clear; it gets annoying when I have to do that a lot and the other person doesn't put in enough effort on it.

On July 21 2016 05:29 Sermokala wrote:

But the petro dollar means higher oil prices means stronger dollar right? And with Isis doing it for us its not our lives we're spending.

On July 21 2016 05:30 IgnE wrote:


Give me an example where intent matters.

I think if we look back at our conversation the effort I put in (take, for example, word count and sentence complexity) is far higher than yours.

On July 21 2016 05:41 Godwrath wrote:
How is it better intent to purposefully accept to kill civilians because you want X terrorist dead, rather than just outright killing civilians?
Genuinely asking.

On July 21 2016 05:41 Godwrath wrote:
How is it better intent to purposefully accept to kill civilians because you want X terrorist dead, rather than just outright killing civilians?
Genuinely asking.

On July 21 2016 05:10 IgnE wrote:


Depends on your assumptions about states and citizens. Drone operations outside of ISIS-controlled Syria at the very least dehumanize and depersonalize non-US citizens.

I'm sure you would agree that it would be immoral/illegal to use drones in the United States with possible citizen casualties. Preemption involves a calculus that the life of a pre-criminal is worth less than the life of an innocent citizen.

But when you are striking in a sovereign country in peacetime you are also devaluing the lives of foreign innocents who are not war participants, have not consented to a legitimate state authority making war (or going to make war) on the US, and have not bargained, as foreign nationals in sovereign territory, for the risk of being blown up in exchange for fewer possible pre-criminals roaming around within their territory. It's like turning them into non-sovereign individuals, unpersons, ants.

On July 21 2016 05:29 Sermokala wrote:

But the petro dollar means higher oil prices means stronger dollar right? And with Isis doing it for us its not our lives we're spending.

The Secret Service is investigating one of Donald Trump's most outspoken supporters, a New Hampshire state representative who said this week that Hillary Clinton should be shot for treason.

“The U.S. Secret Service is aware of this matter and will conduct the appropriate investigation," Nicole Mainor, a spokeswoman for the Secret Service, said about the comments from Al Baldasaro. The investigation was first reported by the Daily Beast.

Baldasaro, a Republican from Londonderry, N.H., is a former Marine who calls himself Trump's "veteran advisor." Trump gave him a key role during a crucial moment in this campaign: In May, when Trump criticized the news media for its coverage of his promise to give $1 million to veterans groups, Baldasaro was given a speaking role and a place in the background when Trump spoke.

This week, as Republicans at the party convention in Cleveland called for Clinton to be jailed, Baldasaro went further.

“Hillary Clinton should be put in the firing line and shot for treason,” Baldasaro said earlier in the week on "The Kuhner Report," a conservative radio show hosted by Jeff Kuhner.

On Wednesday, Baldasaro stood by those comments in an interview with WMUR of Manchester, N.H. He said the death penalty was appropriate for Clinton’s handling of government emails. “As far as I’m concerned, it is treason and the penalty for treason is the firing squad — or maybe it’s the electric chair now,” Baldasaro said.

Baldasaro did not immediately respond to an email sent seeking comment on Wednesday afternoon.

Hope Hicks, a spokeswoman for the Trump campaign, said in a brief statement that "Mr. Trump and the campaign do not agree" that Clinton should be executed for treason. Hicks did not respond to a question asking whether Trump would cut ties with Baldasaro.

A federal appeals court ruled on Wednesday that Texas’s strict voter ID law violates the Voting Rights Act and ordered changes before the November election.

The ruling from the fifth US circuit court of appeals instructs a lower court to make changes that fix the “discriminatory effect” of the 2011 law, but to do so in a way that disrupts this year’s election season as little as possible.

Barack Obama’s administration took the unusual step of deploying the weight of the US justice department in the case when it challenged the law, which requires Texas residents to show one of seven forms of approved identification. The state and other supporters say the Texas law prevents fraud. Opponents say it discriminates by requiring forms of ID that are more difficult to obtain for low-income, African American and Latino voters.

“We are extremely pleased with this outcome. This law will no longer prevent eligible voters from casting a ballot this November,” the attorney Gerry Herbert, a member of the legal team that challenged the law, said following Wednesday’s ruling.

The Texas Democratic party also immediately celebrated, declaring that “the most restrictive and discriminatory Republican voter ID law in country has been struck down”.

The New Orleans-based fifth circuit agreed to rehear the issue after a three-judge panel ruled last year that the law violated the Voting Rights Act.

WASHINGTON ― Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) is on Hillary Clinton’s short list of potential vice presidential nominees. He’s also actively pushing bank deregulation this week as he campaigns for the job.

Kaine signed two letters on Monday urging federal regulators to go easy on banks ― one to help big banks dodge risk management rules, and another to help small banks avoid consumer protection standards.

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is believed to be weighing Kaine among a handful of other potential VP choices. Her pick is widely viewed in Washington as a sign of her governing intentions. The former secretary of state has spent weeks attempting to woo progressive supporters of vanquished primary challenger Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Choosing from one of the handful of names on her short list ― Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) or Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), for instance ― would signal that her camp is taking progressive concerns seriously.

Kaine, by contrast, is setting himself up as a figure willing to do battle with the progressive wing of the party. He has championed the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal that both Sanders and Warren oppose, and he is now publicly siding with bank deregulation advocates at the height of Clinton’s veepstakes.

The big bank letter would help major firms including Capital One, PNC Bank and U.S. Bank, all of which control hundreds of billions of dollars in assets. Such large “regional banks,” Kaine writes, are being discriminated against based solely on the fact that they are so big.

In a letter to Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, Comptroller of the Currency Thomas Curry and FDIC Chair Martin Gruenberg, Kaine argues that it is unfair for these large banks to be required to calculate and report their liquidity ― a critical measure of risk ― on a daily basis. Kaine, along with Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.) and Robert Casey (D-Pa.), argues that bigger banks don’t necessarily carry bigger risks, and thus shouldn’t face more aggressive oversight.

“This distinction is applied unevenly across regional institutions despite similar risk profiles, simply by virtue of an asset threshold,” the letter reads. Translation: just because they’re big, doesn’t mean they should be regulated more closely.

Kaine and his coauthors do draw an exception to this principle for “systemically important” banks ― a term that usually means the six largest banks in the country: JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo and Citigroup. These should be regulated closely. Firms controlling over $400 billion, not so much.

On July 21 2016 05:10 IgnE wrote:
Show nested quote +


Depends on your assumptions about states and citizens. Drone operations outside of ISIS-controlled Syria at the very least dehumanize and depersonalize non-US citizens.

On July 21 2016 07:32 DeepElemBlues wrote:


Drone operations cause far less civilian casualties than either ground combat or traditional airstrikes, which would suggest a more human and personal view of non-US citizens. War itself depersonalizes and dehumanizes so not sure what the point is. It's a rather bizarre world where the most effective method of bombing ever devised so far as limiting collateral damage is portrayed and perceived by many as just as bad if not worse than regular old bombs or missiles sent from a plane, which has always killed far more people who weren't the target.

In any case, the Geneva Conventions places responsibility for civilian casualties in a situation where one side hides among civilians or blatantly uses them as human shields (for example by establishing positions in a residential neighborhood) on that side, not on the other side. The depersonalization and dehumanization is the responsibility of those who control the ground and view civilians as a resource like shells or rifles, to be expended for combat purposes.