|
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. |
Traditional definitions of a "superpower" are varied, but always include exerting and projecting tremendous hard and soft power on a global scale.
Russia only somewhat fits the definition of a "great power", which is simply to be capable of being able to project power on a global scale: their military is only operational in a fairly limited, regional scope (though they do retain economic and political influence beyond that, aka "soft power": hence not fitting the traditional definition, which only concerns itself with military potential). Syria is still fairly close to the Russian border, but they would be completely unable to conduct operations in, say, South Africa or Latin America.
Arguably, the UK and France still better fit the definition of a "great power" than does Russia.
|
On September 29 2016 06:46 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 06:36 Lord Tolkien wrote:On September 29 2016 06:24 Mohdoo wrote:On September 29 2016 06:18 KwarK wrote:On September 29 2016 06:11 Sermokala wrote:On September 29 2016 06:08 KwarK wrote:On September 29 2016 05:57 Sermokala wrote:On September 29 2016 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 29 2016 05:51 Nevuk wrote:On September 29 2016 05:45 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
I side with the senate 100%. This is one case where I do see the messy side and I do see Obama's point, but no. Saudi Arabia is extremely awful and anything we can do to inch ourselves closer to it being accountable gets an A+ from me. That being said, I fully recognize a veto being the responsible thing for Obama to do. This is an instance where I feel the messiness is justified. But I am pretty ignorant. Maybe this could be worse than I am realizing. Happy to be shown to be wrong. While I agree with this, the problem people are citing is that it could make it possible for people in other nations to sue the US. Perhaps, as a planet, we should welcome it? Imagine a world where superpowers are accountable. What if Russia couldn't just give missiles to rebels, end up shooting down a plane, then wiping their hands of it? What if China was accountable? Realistically, this idea of the big 3 being immortal has to go away at some point. Sometimes the only thing to do is rip the bandage off. You're gonna do it eventually, so YOLO. However, I will concede that a world where the US is the only one able to be sued is silly. I welcome a revamp where everyone is accountable, but if the US is the only one, it just tips powers towards the other 2 with no real worldly benefit. You think China and Russia are super-powers that arn't accountable? You think Russia is a superpower? No I was asking Moo if he thought Russia was a superpower. And did he? I think it is a superpower with down syndrome. It does not have the capability to achieve any of the greatness of CN/US/EU, but it still has enough to really shitty on people's day. A shadow of its former self, for sure, but lets not pretend NATO has no purpose anymore. Russia is a major player in the Syrian conflict. They matter a lot. It is easy to shit on them, but they are still relevant. Hah. No. Russia faces severe demographic crisis and an economy that...well. It's not a pretty long-term projection. It's going to be challenging to keep their current, relative status and influence abroad. Crimea was a response to the drift away of Ukraine proper from the Russian sphere (as was Georgia), meanwhile China continues to expand economic ties and investments in Central Asia, a region traditionally dominated by Russia. They will remain a strong regional actor/power, but to call them a "superpower" is a complete misuse of the term. They don't even fit the traditional definition of a "great power". perhaps I am simply misusing the term then. I considered Russia a superpower because they are a nuclear power and a really large economy. Now that I have done more research, I am finding that Russia's military (nukes) are basically the only reason they are relevant nowadays. Weird. Thank you all for correcting my ignorance.
Russia is a struggling, a fact Putin is pretty good at hiding from normal people behind all his bluster. All the millitary shit they are doing is just one of the ways of shifting the focus on how badly Russia is doing aswell as of course gaining some political and geographic capital. With the US having zero moral high ground with all their FP fuckups and the fact that the world things they are losing their shit he gets way more leverage.
Cosmetically speaking, Congress and now Trump are making Russia great again.
|
United States43798 Posts
Russia is expected to run out of cash to fulfill its obligations sometime in mid 2017. Their budget shortfall fund is approaching just $15b, from $90b before the oil price fall started. They also burned $140b in foreign currency assets trying to prop up the ruble in the face of sanctions.
It makes the estimated $51b cost of the Sochi Olympics, and the $3b/year subsidies to the Crimea, look pretty foolish. Vanity projects to distract from the failing economy aren't worth much if they make the problem worse.
|
On September 29 2016 06:50 Plansix wrote:
Teachers, try this in your classrooms. Tell us how it works out.
is he trying to lose votes? cuz it looks like he's trying to lose votes
|
On September 29 2016 07:32 ticklishmusic wrote:is he trying to lose votes? cuz it looks like he's trying to lose votes
Looks pretty clear to me that he was joking with his audience. I read an article in The Atlantic last week that said something interesting about the difference between Trump supporters and Trump's opponents. The point was this: Trump's supporters take Trump seriously, but not literally, whereas Trump's opponents take Trump literally, but not seriously.
|
|
|
On September 29 2016 07:48 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 07:32 ticklishmusic wrote:is he trying to lose votes? cuz it looks like he's trying to lose votes Looks pretty clear to me that he was joking with his audience. I read an article in The Atlantic last week that said something interesting about the difference between Trump supporters and Trump's opponents. The point was this: Trump's supporters take Trump seriously, but not literally, whereas Trump's opponents take Trump literally, but not seriously.
that will be a great relief when he discriminates people but does so sarcastically. The guy's not running for the next season of the Apprentice. Although honestly that's what it feels like.
|
It will take another 2-3 days until we can have a good picture on the effect on polls. But yeah, I wouldn't expect anything big.
|
On September 29 2016 07:48 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 07:32 ticklishmusic wrote:is he trying to lose votes? cuz it looks like he's trying to lose votes Looks pretty clear to me that he was joking with his audience. I read an article in The Atlantic last week that said something interesting about the difference between Trump supporters and Trump's opponents. The point was this: Trump's supporters take Trump seriously, but not literally, whereas Trump's opponents take Trump literally, but not seriously.
Hang on a second let me page Mike Pence to confirm and get a legitimate translation.
Edit: Mike Pence: "you know biology]major, Mr. Trump is a good, good man. I know his heart, and his values, and when he asked if there were any christian conservatives in the room, he was really trying to highlight the diversity in our campaign, and that we fight for and cherish all Americans." That settles that.
|
Mike Pence responds, "Look at how I governed Indiana. What do you think?"
|
Johnson and Weld town hall on MSNBC has started.
|
On September 29 2016 08:04 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Johnson and Weld town hall on MSNBC has started.
I love that a vote for Johnson is a vote for Clinton and Trump at the same time. Maybe that's what I'll do haha.
|
California’s state treasurer announced on Tuesday that it is imposing a year-long ban on working with Wells Fargo after staff “fleeced” the bank’s customers by creating 2m unauthorized accounts.
The move by the US’s largest state comes as the bank faces another grilling in Congress over the scandal that has already led the bank to pay $185m in penalties and clawback millions in bonuses from top executives.
“The recent discovery that Wells Fargo & Company fleeced its customers by opening fraudulent accounts for the purpose of extracting millions in illegal fees demonstrates, at best, a reckless lack of institutional control, and, at worst, a culture which actively promotes wanton greed,” John Chiang, California’s state treasurer, wrote in a letter to the bank on Tuesday.
Chiang’s office oversees nearly $2tn in annual banking transactions and manages a $75bn investment pool.
“My office has long relied on Wells Fargo, our oldest California-based financial institution, as a partner to meet the state’s investment and borrowing needs,” wrote Chiang. “But, to borrow from Albert Einstein, ‘Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with [larger] matters.’ In the case of Wells Fargo, how can I continue to entrust the public’s money to an organization which has shown such little regard for the legions of Californians who have placed their financial well-being in its care?”
The $185m settlement announced at the end of the month was a result of an audit that revealed that Wells Fargo staff created as many as 1.5m deposit accounts and 565,000 credit card accounts without customers’ consent. As a result, the bank fired more than 5,300 employees. The bank denies that the creation of these accounts was part of an orchestrated effort.
According to bank’s critics, the bank’s staff opened such unauthorized accounts in order to meet their sales quotas. The bank announced yesterday that it is terminating all of its sales quotas starting 1 October.
In light of this scandal, Chiang’s office has effective immediately suspended its investment in all Wells Fargo securities, use of Wells Fargo as a broker-dealer for investment purchases and use of Wells Fargo as managing underwriter on negotiated sales of California state bonds.
These sanctions are in effect for 12 months during which Chiang asked that Wells Fargo quarterly report back its compliance with the terms of its $185m settlement with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Los Angeles city attorney, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
Chiang has also called for separation of the chief executive and chair positions at Wells Fargo – both of which are currently held by John Stumpf, a review of Wells Fargo’s compensation practices and clawbacks of pay for those executives who are linked to the predatory sales practices.
Source
|
United States43798 Posts
On September 29 2016 08:24 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 08:04 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Johnson and Weld town hall on MSNBC has started. I love that a vote for Johnson is a vote for Clinton and Trump at the same time. Maybe that's what I'll do haha.
Only if you apply electoral system math and if you apply electoral system math you don't have a vote because you're in the wrong state.
|
On September 29 2016 06:46 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 06:36 Lord Tolkien wrote:On September 29 2016 06:24 Mohdoo wrote:On September 29 2016 06:18 KwarK wrote:On September 29 2016 06:11 Sermokala wrote:On September 29 2016 06:08 KwarK wrote:On September 29 2016 05:57 Sermokala wrote:On September 29 2016 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 29 2016 05:51 Nevuk wrote:On September 29 2016 05:45 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
I side with the senate 100%. This is one case where I do see the messy side and I do see Obama's point, but no. Saudi Arabia is extremely awful and anything we can do to inch ourselves closer to it being accountable gets an A+ from me. That being said, I fully recognize a veto being the responsible thing for Obama to do. This is an instance where I feel the messiness is justified. But I am pretty ignorant. Maybe this could be worse than I am realizing. Happy to be shown to be wrong. While I agree with this, the problem people are citing is that it could make it possible for people in other nations to sue the US. Perhaps, as a planet, we should welcome it? Imagine a world where superpowers are accountable. What if Russia couldn't just give missiles to rebels, end up shooting down a plane, then wiping their hands of it? What if China was accountable? Realistically, this idea of the big 3 being immortal has to go away at some point. Sometimes the only thing to do is rip the bandage off. You're gonna do it eventually, so YOLO. However, I will concede that a world where the US is the only one able to be sued is silly. I welcome a revamp where everyone is accountable, but if the US is the only one, it just tips powers towards the other 2 with no real worldly benefit. You think China and Russia are super-powers that arn't accountable? You think Russia is a superpower? No I was asking Moo if he thought Russia was a superpower. And did he? I think it is a superpower with down syndrome. It does not have the capability to achieve any of the greatness of CN/US/EU, but it still has enough to really shitty on people's day. A shadow of its former self, for sure, but lets not pretend NATO has no purpose anymore. Russia is a major player in the Syrian conflict. They matter a lot. It is easy to shit on them, but they are still relevant. Hah. No. Russia faces severe demographic crisis and an economy that...well. It's not a pretty long-term projection. It's going to be challenging to keep their current, relative status and influence abroad. Crimea was a response to the drift away of Ukraine proper from the Russian sphere (as was Georgia), meanwhile China continues to expand economic ties and investments in Central Asia, a region traditionally dominated by Russia. They will remain a strong regional actor/power, but to call them a "superpower" is a complete misuse of the term. They don't even fit the traditional definition of a "great power". perhaps I am simply misusing the term then. I considered Russia a superpower because they are a nuclear power and a really large economy. Now that I have done more research, I am finding that Russia's military (nukes) are basically the only reason they are relevant nowadays. Weird. Thank you all for correcting my ignorance.
There's only one superpower in the world at the moment. That said, Tolkien and Kwark are really reaching with their conclusions about Russia, partially based off wishful thinking. The economic/military/political/technological power of Russia is quite significant even on a global scale. The concerns they bring up (demographics, cash shortages, etc) are real and valid, but their conclusions based on them are a reflection of their desires more so than the truth. It would be like saying the US is fucked because it has a dysfunctional Congress, a debt-to-GDP ratio of over 100%, ethnic strife between blacks and the police, and it can't even win a war in Iraq. All those concerns are important and real but the conclusion based on those concerns is a pile of horseshit.
Similarly, the issues of FP are far more complex than you make them out to be in your appraisal of US/Russian/Chinese policies. Every country in the world is a piece of shit from the proper perspective.
|
On September 29 2016 06:04 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 05:58 Mohdoo wrote:On September 29 2016 05:54 farvacola wrote:On September 29 2016 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 29 2016 05:51 Nevuk wrote:On September 29 2016 05:45 Mohdoo wrote:On September 29 2016 05:43 Nevuk wrote:
Congress overrode Obama's veto on the JASTA bill. It is his first overridden veto. Earnest called it the most embarrassing thing the Senate has done since 1983 (what happened in 83?)
Having read some of the shallow, brief arguments, I do see the point of both sides. I side with the senate 100%. This is one case where I do see the messy side and I do see Obama's point, but no. Saudi Arabia is extremely awful and anything we can do to inch ourselves closer to it being accountable gets an A+ from me. That being said, I fully recognize a veto being the responsible thing for Obama to do. This is an instance where I feel the messiness is justified. But I am pretty ignorant. Maybe this could be worse than I am realizing. Happy to be shown to be wrong. While I agree with this, the problem people are citing is that it could make it possible for people in other nations to sue the US. Perhaps, as a planet, we should welcome it? Imagine a world where superpowers are accountable. What if Russia couldn't just give missiles to rebels, end up shooting down a plane, then wiping their hands of it? What if China was accountable? Realistically, this idea of the big 3 being immortal has to go away at some point. Sometimes the only thing to do is rip the bandage off. You're gonna do it eventually, so YOLO. How exactly does a legislative act that creates an in rem cause of action against Saudi Arabia going to do all this magic accountability work? It's not even clear that the courts will actually honor the statute as written. So where's the harm, though? The conversation shifting towards "Fuck Saudi Arabia for pulling a bunch of bullshit around the world" still sounds great to me. Public pressure is, in itself, powerful. Saudi Arabia currently gives 0 shits about what me or my entire country thinks of it. Saudi Arabia is our ally for reasons that have nothing to do with the nobility of their government. Saudi Arabia suddenly needing to have an ounce of decency sounds great to me. Ok so re-evaluating our relationship with and moving away from Saudi Arabia as an ally is an important goal.
Saudi Arabia might just be the shittiest ally ever, and I look forward to the day the US reworks its political alignments to distance itself from it. I'd levy John Boner's criticism of Ted Cruz at the Sauds - I've never seen a more miserable son-of-a-bitch of a country in my life. And there are a lot of shitty countries in the world.
|
Also Trumps new debate prep strategy: do a rally in Chicago, Iowa, Wisconsin in one day.
|
No but seriously, he needs to sit down for a week and grind out some solid debate prep. Hillary should be easy pickings but he blew it badly.
|
On September 29 2016 08:57 LegalLord wrote:
No but seriously, he needs to sit down for a week and grind out some solid debate prep. Hillary should be easy pickings but he blew it badly.
What if he's not even capable of that? He's going to come back with rage, and Hillary is going be preparing for the second debate, not the first. It's pretty clear that Hillary manipulated Trump at a psychological level to bait his narcissism. It was also reported she was working with psychiatrists.
And this aligns entirely with the Art of the Deal author.
|
On September 29 2016 08:57 LegalLord wrote:
No but seriously, he needs to sit down for a week and grind out some solid debate prep. Hillary should be easy pickings but he blew it badly.
He can't suddenly become equanimous policy donald. He doesn't have the temperament for it. He's not actually a super-smart con man who just acts like a bully to please all his followers. Hillary just needs to bait him again with something and he'll start to ramble. Also that's exactly what his followers like. If he goes deep into content he's going to disappoint his base.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
