| 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. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4400 Posts
On February 26 2017 07:20 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Even if this was true there is little point bragging about a 12 billion drop in debt when you're proposing a 1 trillion infrastructure program thats going to go straight on the credit card. As for Perez, good to see the democrat party has learned absolutely nothing.Establishment personified. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
Trump proposal for terrorist listing of Iran Revolutionary Guard in limbo: sources | Reuters A proposal the Trump administration is considering to designate Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization has stalled over warnings from defense and intelligence officials that the move could backfire, according to officials familiar with the matter. "If you do that, there is no way to escalate, and you would foreclose any possibility of talking to the Iranians about anything," one of the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. Momentum behind a possible presidential order has slowed amid an internal debate that has included concerns it could undermine the fight against Islamic State, draw opposition from key allies, torpedo any U.S.-Iran diplomatic prospects, and complicate enforcement of the Iran nuclear deal, U.S. and European sources said. The proposal - part of a broader effort to make good on President Donald Trump's vow to take a tougher line against Iran - would, if implemented, take the unprecedented step of blacklisting the entire IRGC as a "Foreign Terrorist Organization." That would go far beyond the targeted sanctions already imposed on individuals and entities linked to the IRGC, Iran's most powerful security force, which also controls large swathes of the Iranian economy and wields great political influence. The proposal has been in the works for weeks, and was originally expected to be rolled out this month. But while the idea remains under consideration, it is unclear when – or even if – an announcement might be forthcoming, according to the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Iran denies any involvement in terrorism, though it is listed by the State Department along with Syria and Sudan as a state sponsor of terrorism. A decision on the matter was complicated by the Feb. 13 resignation of Trump's national security adviser, Michael Flynn, over disclosures that he discussed U.S. sanctions on Russia with the Russian ambassador before taking office. Flynn was one of the Trump White House's leading Iran hawks, and was spearheading the crafting of a strategy for confronting Tehran. www.reuters.com And in other news Iran was looking to buy more uranium ore from Kazakhstan (compliant with the Iran deal, of course). | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23772 Posts
On February 26 2017 07:59 kwizach wrote: I think kwiz posted a succinct comment on his feelings about the election, had already explained at length previously why he supported Perez, and is tired of your passive-aggressive posting about him. I give that dodge a 3 out of 10. The question wasn't why support him, it was what's to be gained from him being the chair as opposed to the deputy chair. Just say "nothing" so we can move on, or give us what it is, but don't try to play the victim and use it to deflect off of the issue. EDIT: Does it really not bother people that the top Chair of the Democratic party doesn't know how to chair a meeting, is it that you guys don't know what I'm referring to, or something else? | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On February 26 2017 08:22 GreenHorizons wrote: EDIT: Does it really not bother people that the top Chair of the Democratic party doesn't know how to chair a meeting, is it that you guys don't know what I'm referring to, or something else? For me personally: I will say that I simply don't care that much. It's not my party. If they lose, it's their loss, not mine. I will vote for them if and when I want to, and I'm ok with that right now. As such I didn't pay enough attention to the DNC issue to know or care. I just assumed they would push Perez through (Obama and Clinton outrank Sanders in the party) and that was all the support needed to make him the chair. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On February 26 2017 08:33 LegalLord wrote: I think the oneofthem view - that sandernistas are just ungrateful asshats who need to learn to fall the fuck in line - is the dominant view of the party. The "party loyalists" who permeate this thread echo that view, albeit with a bit less blatant disdain for those progressive distractions. It would seem more sensible to me if there was more substantive impact but Perez before Ellison vs. Ellison before Perez seems so inconsequential that they're just stirring the pot for no real reason. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23772 Posts
On February 26 2017 08:34 zlefin wrote: it does bother me. It seems like something you should read if you're actually going to be chairing something important enough to follow a rule system. Like how the hell did that not come up in vetting? It's not even that he didn't seem to know how to chair one, but he seemed less aware of how it worked than random people at my district convention. At least he'll be a poster child for why we need to teach Roberts Rules in school and apparently the white house too. On February 26 2017 08:36 TheYango wrote: It would seem more sensible to me if there was more substantive impact but Perez before Ellison vs. Ellison before Perez seems so inconsequential that they're just stirring the pot for no real reason. It's either that they are so addicted to money they couldn't risk Ellison, or like I said before, they just got their ass kicked by the worst presidential candidate in modern history and didn't want to be seen as losing again, especially to a guy that represents the part of the Democratic party that Hillary supporters waffle between blaming for Hillary's loss and calling too inconsequential to matter. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11787 Posts
On February 26 2017 07:52 Gahlo wrote: The ridiculousness of the sum is better than its parts. It just has a really good punchline. After about 3 questions I realized that the answers they want to here were all "A. Yes" unless it was only a text box. I am quite sad. I went through all the trouble of filling out that crazy questionnaire, then noticed that they want a name and a zip code at the bottom  But i gotta say, those questions are amazing. If someone were to ask me to design leading questions, i could not come up with better ones. But the "right" answer is definitively not always "Yes". A lot of them also obviously desire a "no", and most of them can only be correctly answered by typing in the "other" box, because they are simply based on insanity. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On February 26 2017 08:15 LegalLord wrote: www.reuters.com And in other news Iran was looking to buy more uranium ore from Kazakhstan (compliant with the Iran deal, of course). They want to designate a foreign army unit as a terrorist organization? They really want to go to war with Iran... I'm pretty sure within a year there will be an invasion at this rate. :-X Literally every step they take with Iran is warmongering. So many lives will be wasted for oil again. Disgusting. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23772 Posts
On February 26 2017 09:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: They want to designate a foreign army unit as a terrorist organization? They really want to go to war with Iran... I'm pretty sure within a year there will be an invasion at this rate. :-X Literally every step they take with Iran is warmongering. So many lives will be wasted for oil again. Disgusting. If we're not diving headlong into a large scale conflict, the local military base is doing a great job of faking it. | ||
|
Howie_Dewitt
United States1416 Posts
On February 26 2017 09:24 GreenHorizons wrote: If we're not diving headlong into a large scale conflict, the local military base is doing a great job of faking it. What's happening at the local military base? | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11787 Posts
Just remember how much fun iraq was. And then don't do it again. Just...don't. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23772 Posts
On February 26 2017 09:31 Howie_Dewitt wrote: What's happening at the local military base? Let's just say I'm happy to be in America because most people would be terrified by all the artillery, automatic gun fire, low flying fighter jets and practice convoys. Going to just add my previous edit in case it got missed. EDIT: Reminds me of the year before we invaded Iraq. It's always weird talking about the local base on here. There's a lot of things that are common knowledge around here (because families have to plan for stuff like elongated deployments) but I have no idea what people know or don't know if they don't live in some sort of proximity to relevant bases. Let's just say they don't offer 88mikes (truck drivers) up to $40,000 in signing bonuses (including $20,000 to ship immediately into training) for no reason. EDIT 2: Realizing most here probably aren't familiar, that's comparable to the sign up bonuses one could get if they wanted to be a special forces paratrooper. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22164 Posts
On February 26 2017 09:35 Simberto wrote: You should realize that this time around, you are going to have a hard time finding ANYONE to help you. A lot of countries helped you in Afghanistan. A few helped you in Iraq. If you randomly invade another country in the region for no apparent reason, you are going to have to do it alone. Just remember how much fun iraq was. And then don't do it again. Just...don't. I also imagine the local population will be more unfriendly then they were in Iraq. Those people glad to be rid of a dictator and willing to work with the army to make a better country? They won't be around this time. | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On February 26 2017 08:22 GreenHorizons wrote: I give that dodge a 3 out of 10. The question wasn't why support him, it was what's to be gained from him being the chair as opposed to the deputy chair. Just say "nothing" so we can move on, or give us what it is, but don't try to play the victim and use it to deflect off of the issue. I'm not playing the victim, I'm telling you that I'm tired of your passive-aggressive posting about me. You regularly refer to me or ask me questions in your posts, not because you want to engage in actual debate, but because you want to caricature my answers or non-answers to make a point (and you have a long history of doing that with other posters as well). A good example of this kind of non-engagement was when you decided to butt in an exchange I was having with xDaunt not once, not twice, not thrice, but four times, and when I replied to you all you did (instead of responding to me and what I said to you) was use my response as a petty attack against me in a post directed at another poster, even though you were completely missing the point. And the best part of that exchange was that it was revealed the next day that your claim (that you had repeated more than four times) about CNN getting the story wrong was actually false, so all you did was waste everyone's time and engage in petty point-scoring about something you didn't understand and somehow managed to get wrong. The fact that I don't take the time to answer every question in the thread, especially not your baits, doesn't prove whatever point you're trying to make on a given day, so I'm simply telling you to drop your toxic way of arguing. And the thing is that I've defended you plenty of times on these forums in the past, that I'd be happy to leave past grievances behind and engage in honest discussions with you (and we agree on plenty of issues), yet you keep taking these cheap shots and making snide comments that simply turn off any possibility to do that. Too bad. Anyway, since Mohdoo asked the question, I sent him a quick reply in PM. Moving on. I found this to be a pretty good read on populism and its roots. It references many contributions by other authors, and while I have some reservations with regards to some of the points that are raised and it remains an overview that doesn't really go in-depth, the commentaries offered can be insightful. The Anatomy of Populist Economics [...] Given populism’s many faces, is it really possible to identify a root cause? For Warwick University’s Robert Skidelsky, it is no coincidence that the two major political upheavals of 2016 – the Brexiteers’ success in last June’s referendum and Trump’s election victory – occurred in “the two countries that most fervently embraced neoliberal economics.” The US and the UK’s economic model over the past few decades, Skidelsky observes, has allowed for “obscenely lavish rewards for a few, high levels of unemployment and underemployment, and curtailment of the state’s role in welfare provision.” And this widening inequality, he writes, “strips away the democratic veil that hides from the majority of citizens the true workings of power.” But Gavekal Dragonomics Chief Economist Anatole Kaletsky sees another dynamic at work, and offers “several reasons to question the link between populist politics and economic distress.” For starters, he points out that “most populist voters are neither poor nor unemployed; they are not victims of globalization, immigration, and free trade.” Having analyzed Brexit exit polls and voter-survey responses, Kaletsky concludes that “cultural and ethnic attitudes, not direct economic motivations, are the real distinguishing features of anti-globalization voting.” At first blush, these arguments may seem incompatible; but their disagreement is really only between ultimate and proximate causes. For Skidelsky, “It is when the rewards of economic progress accrue mainly to the already wealthy that the disjunction between minority and majority cultural values becomes seriously destabilizing.” Likewise, for Kaletsky, “The main relevance of economics is that the 2008 financial crisis created conditions for a political backlash by older, more conservative voters, who have been losing the cultural battles over race, gender, and social identity.” Harvard political philosopher Michael Sandel warns against focusing exclusively on “the bigotry in populist protest” or viewing it “only in economic terms.” The fundamental issue, he argues, is “that the upheavals of 2016 stemmed from the establishment’s inability to address – or even adequately recognize – genuine grievances.” And, because these grievances “are about social esteem, not only about wages and jobs,” they are difficult to disentangle “from the intolerant aspects of populist protest” – namely, anti-immigrant sentiments. Nobel laureate economist Edmund Phelps also links populist voters’ anger to their loss of dignity in the larger political economy. As the share of US employment in manufacturing has steadily declined, blue-collar workers, Phelps notes. “have lost the opportunity to do meaningful work, and to feel a sense of agency.” In other words, “losing their ‘good jobs’” meant losing “the central source of meaning in their lives.” And while many of the lost manufacturing jobs were replaced with new jobs in new sectors, as Oxford University historian Margaret MacMillan cautions, nuanced economic arguments “cannot counter the unhappiness of people who feel marginalized, undervalued, and scorned.” [...] Source (free account needed, I think) | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23772 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On February 26 2017 10:57 GreenHorizons wrote: Hey Mohdoo, you want to let us in on his secret, since several people are curious about the same thing and he's the only one with an answer it seems? Come on man. This is not classy. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35172 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
RSL Revival
ByuN vs Maru
MaxPax vs TriGGeR
WardiTV Team League
BSL
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs Calm
Royal vs Mind
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
