US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1493

On May 26 2019 02:22 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I'm sure we're unique in the volume we supply. But definitely not in supplying arms.

On May 26 2019 06:39 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
But would they though? Like, if the US stops, would another western nation take our place? I figure it would go like "The US stopped selling SA arms? Guess we're done. We don't want that title." And in pops Russia.

Wiki says 10% of all arms sales went to SA between 2011-2015.

The UK nearly doubled the value of arms sales to countries on the government’s list of human rights abusers in the past year, figures reveal

Sales were granted to 18 countries on the list, including China, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Israel, Egypt and Pakistan, compared to 20 different states in 2016.

The value of sales to Saudi Arabia, currently embroiled in a bloody conflict in Yemen against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels where thousands of civilians have been killed and millions left in need of aid, alone totalled £1.13bn, the group said.

Theresa May’s government is “actively arming and supporting many of the regimes that even it believes are responsible for terrible human rights abuses”, CAAT’s Andrew Smith told The Independent.

He added: “There is little oversight in the system, and no controls over how these arms will be used once they have left the UK. The arms sales being agreed today could be used to fuel atrocities for years to come. Right now UK-made fighter jets and bombs are playing a central role in the Saudi-led destruction of Yemen, and the government and arms companies have totally failed to monitor or evaluate how this deadly equipment is being used.

On May 25 2019 18:57 Acrofales wrote:

Maybe it needs more fleshing out. I suspect you actually have thought through a lot of the actual issues, whereas nebuchad's ideas are still at the "and then we will have world harmony" stage.

I was literally only going off the "democratize wealth". Which sounds great, but... well, who incentivizes the creation of new business? That's my main gripe with socialism. But there's also the problem of the black market, which is present in every system where the government controls the market. My experience in places like Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Argentina and Cuba has been that eventually all the nice things are *only* available on the black market (because the rewards are far greater than on the regular market and supply is far too small for the demand). Leaving the regular market for only the most basic of necessities. And where there's a black market, there's people making money off it, which is contrary to the principal of democratizing wealth.

On May 26 2019 10:14 Nebuchad wrote:


The main thing I want to do is distinguish between a system where the state owns the means of production and a system where workers own the means of production, in my view that's a pretty vital difference. I probably should make sure I clarify when I say "democratic control" cause I can see how that makes you think of the former. But in my view we're talking worker co-ops and a somewhat regular market in terms of how it looks like. Just no bosses, and as a result, no exploitation. Extending the concepts of democracy to the workplace, not keeping control of the means of production and concentrating it to a single place that we assume is better because it's the state and the state is democratic.

It's possible that GH is more open than I am to a state ownership system, I'm not 100% sure on that. I find the threat of authoritarianism very hard to ignore in these systems, and more directly I'm doubtful that we are really eliminating exploitation when we do this, and that's supposed to be the goal.

On May 26 2019 22:04 Zambrah wrote:


What fucking signal could he possibly mean by that?

Is he going to start aggressively shitting on Biden now or something?

On June 06 2018 10:06 crms wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

Tweet in spoiler, video of cops assaulting a suspect.


My State is going to make the news again. This is the same police dept that executed the unarmed crying man in the hotel a couple years back. This is the 3rd major incident (caught on tape) for mesa PD this year. So far it seems the police chief has placed 4 of these officers on 'administrative leave' but I'm sure they'll be back on the job in no time.

I expect this type of behavior now and again no mater how you 'reform the police' because some people are just shit heads and will exploit their power. I think what bothers me the most is the lack of repercussions or accountability. I get that reform and training etc., is hard but why is it too much to expect something to come from these abuses? Why can't we at minimum hold these bad actors within law enforcement accountable and prosecute?

Officer Rudy Monarrez received a written reprimand for violating the department’s code of conduct, and Lt. Timothy Wahlberg “sustained non-discipline corrective action,” Mesa Police Department spokeswoman Irene Mahoney told KTAR News 92.3 FM in an email.

The department did not respond to a request to provide further details about the discipline.

Three other officers investigated were cleared of wrongdoing, Mahoney said.

The case was the first of four incidents that came to light last June in which Mesa officers were accused of using excessive force.

The man who was nearly beaten unconscious by five Mesa police officers after he didn't immediately sit down in a May 2018 incident has filed a lawsuit.

Monarrez then struck Johnson, according to the lawsuit, before he was then shoved into the door, placed on the ground, shackled and gagged with a spit mask. The police report said this was done because an officer thought Johnson was going to spit on him.

Three officers picked Johnson up by his feet and arms before carrying him into the elevator and to a patrol car, the video shows.

"The Officer Defendants knew that (Johnson) had committed no crime and that there was no probable cause for his arrest," the lawsuit states.

The Mesa city prosecutor dropped charges of disorderly conduct and hindering police against Johnson in June 2018.

Briefly stated, over 100 black men were tortured by officers in order to force confessions, drive them to incriminate co-defendants, or to intimidate possible witnesses to police brutality. One of them was Philip Adkins, whose testimony about the hours that followed a 5 a.m. knock on his door is representative of some of the atrocities men like him endured at the hands of police officers. During the space of four to five hours, three detectives picked up, handcuffed, and detained Adkins without officially arresting him, reading him his Miranda rights, or allowing him to contact family or counsel.

The physical violence began when “without warning one of them slugged” him while he was handcuffed in the back of a patrol car. The three detectives then drove around parts of Chicago with him in the car, including during a stop at McDonald’s, and interrogated him about suspected criminal activity from the night before. Finding his answers unsatisfactory, one of the detectives started poking him “with great force” in the groin area with a flashlight. As they continued to drive around, two detectives took turns delivering blows to his private parts, knees, elbows, and ribs.

On May 26 2019 18:58 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
Trump: I trust Kim Jong-Un, some people may be worried about him continuing with building weapons but not me because called Biden low-IQ so we have a lot in common.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1132459370816708608

You can really feel the adoration for a man that executes his opponents by sitting them in front of an anti aircraft gun.

On May 26 2019 18:58 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
Trump: I trust Kim Jong-Un, some people may be worried about him continuing with building weapons but not me because called Biden low-IQ so we have a lot in common.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1132459370816708608

You can really feel the adoration for a man that executes his opponents by sitting them in front of an anti aircraft gun.

On May 27 2019 01:11 GreenHorizons wrote:
Between the two of them (Trump and Kim Jong-Un) which is really the more predictable and trustworthy (human rights violations aside)?

On May 27 2019 01:45 Gorsameth wrote:
Is that even a question? Kim obviously.

On May 27 2019 01:58 GreenHorizons wrote:

(presuming you're not being sarcastic)

Any hope for sanctions to take the most potent offensive nuclear arsenal from someone so unpredictable, dishonest, and known to arm terrorists around the globe?