|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 26 2022 02:46 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2022 02:16 Gorsameth wrote:On January 26 2022 01:18 Jockmcplop wrote:
I wonder if all the people hankering for a good old war with Russia over Ukraine think the same thing about Israel taking territory that isn't theirs?
I mean, what if they don't stop at building settlements in Palestinian territory and decide to build them all over the world?
Best have a war, eh? Plenty of people in this thread have previously expressed that they don't agree with Israel's occupation of Palestine. This is not the gotya you were hoping for. It wasn't supposed to be a gotya. My point is that going to war is not seen as a valid solution to those problems. Russia are pretty evil, yeah, but personally I don't see America having a war with them as a solution to that.
Just to be clear what I and maybe others are saying:
No: Start a war with Russia
Yes: If Russia is actively attempting to overthrow the Ukrainian government, The US should use military force to prevent that
If Russia were to simply not try to overthrow Ukraine, I don't think anyone is seeing any reason for a military conflict. If Russia were to show a desire to full-on invade countries, yes, that needs to be nipped in the bud.
India/Pakistan/China hissing at each other over minor border disputes can't be compared to directly occupying and overthrowing a government with military force. The world collectively decided Crimea was not worth war. If Russia just decides to keep on going, yes, it does make sense to stop that by preventing them from actually overthrowing Ukraine.
The only way we can presuppose Russia doesn't intend to conquer countries is if they don't conquer any countries. Trying to conquer Ukraine makes it impossible to say Russia doesn't intend to conquer countries. Once that line is crossed, Russia using their military to conquer a country, defending Ukraine using a military is what I think is correct.
|
On January 26 2022 02:58 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2022 02:53 Gorsameth wrote:On January 26 2022 02:46 Jockmcplop wrote:On January 26 2022 02:16 Gorsameth wrote:On January 26 2022 01:18 Jockmcplop wrote:
I wonder if all the people hankering for a good old war with Russia over Ukraine think the same thing about Israel taking territory that isn't theirs?
I mean, what if they don't stop at building settlements in Palestinian territory and decide to build them all over the world?
Best have a war, eh? Plenty of people in this thread have previously expressed that they don't agree with Israel's occupation of Palestine. This is not the gotya you were hoping for. It wasn't supposed to be a gotya. My point is that going to war is not seen as a valid solution to those problems. Russia are pretty evil, yeah, but personally I don't see America having a war with them as a solution to that. Right, so what are the other options? We can let Russia have Ukraine and hope they settle for that. And not end up in this exact same spot with another country in a few years. We can draw a line in the sand and say no futher or else. Or we can do what? Russia's assurance they will play nice isn't worth anything after they already broke the existing agreement when they annexed Crimea. Already a bunch of sanctions on Russia that doesn't seem to deter them. No one wants war, but what other options are there to put on the table? But if you dig down into the reasons for this war it is essentially to stop the unnecessary suffering of the Ukrainian people, right? How is having a huge war in their country going to do that? Would America be able to win? How long would it drag on for? How many dead are we looking at? If the US wants to increase sanctions on Russia and their allies I'm all for it. Non war escalation would be fine by me. Using war as a threat is fine. Actually going to war with Russia has to be an absolute last resort in response to an existential threat, and nothing less than an existential threat, because if there isn't one, war creates one. Using war as a threat requires you to be willing to go through with it, you can't both be fine with using war as a threat and only wanting war as a last resort to an existential threat.
There is a rather long history of sanctions not actually doing that much, you can inconvenience people by seizing their foreign assets if they are not sufficiently obfuscated. But beyond that your just inflicting suffering on the innocent people while those in charge go on as before.
No one wants the war (outside of perhaps some crazy warhawks). The hope is that the threat of force will be enough to get Russia to back off.
If not then best case is probably a swift strike to any invading forces in an attempt to force them back and reconsider.
If that fails then yeah things will get very fucked up, but if Russia is willing to actually go to war then things were always going to get fucked sooner or later, there is no reason to believe Russia just cares about Ukraine and that every other non-Russian aligned country in the former USSR isn't going to scramble to find a way to defend themselves from a future Russian invasion, no doubt only going to make such an invasion more likely in the process.
As for 'going to war to prevent suffering makes no sense because people suffer more in war' by that logic every dictator in the world gets to conquer any country they want because they will be willing to inflict suffering on their own people and 'we' won't.
Under that belief the entirety of Europe would be speaking German today.
|
One pretty simple reason I oppose the US going to war with Russia over Ukraine is that I wouldn't stand shoulder to shoulder with the Azov Battalion to do it. As such (and for plenty of other reasons), I find it unconscionable to casually advocate sending others in my place.
|
On January 26 2022 03:34 GreenHorizons wrote:
One pretty simple reason I oppose the US going to war with Russia over Ukraine is that I wouldn't stand shoulder to shoulder with the Azov Battalion to do it. As such (and for plenty of other reasons), I find it unconscionable to casually advocate sending others in my place.
So you are saying you'd rather Ukraine be conquered? It feels like those are the 2 options. Do you see a third option?
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 26 2022 03:10 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2022 02:58 Jockmcplop wrote:On January 26 2022 02:53 Gorsameth wrote:On January 26 2022 02:46 Jockmcplop wrote:On January 26 2022 02:16 Gorsameth wrote:On January 26 2022 01:18 Jockmcplop wrote:
I wonder if all the people hankering for a good old war with Russia over Ukraine think the same thing about Israel taking territory that isn't theirs?
I mean, what if they don't stop at building settlements in Palestinian territory and decide to build them all over the world?
Best have a war, eh? Plenty of people in this thread have previously expressed that they don't agree with Israel's occupation of Palestine. This is not the gotya you were hoping for. It wasn't supposed to be a gotya. My point is that going to war is not seen as a valid solution to those problems. Russia are pretty evil, yeah, but personally I don't see America having a war with them as a solution to that. Right, so what are the other options? We can let Russia have Ukraine and hope they settle for that. And not end up in this exact same spot with another country in a few years. We can draw a line in the sand and say no futher or else. Or we can do what? Russia's assurance they will play nice isn't worth anything after they already broke the existing agreement when they annexed Crimea. Already a bunch of sanctions on Russia that doesn't seem to deter them. No one wants war, but what other options are there to put on the table? But if you dig down into the reasons for this war it is essentially to stop the unnecessary suffering of the Ukrainian people, right? How is having a huge war in their country going to do that? Would America be able to win? How long would it drag on for? How many dead are we looking at? If the US wants to increase sanctions on Russia and their allies I'm all for it. Non war escalation would be fine by me. Using war as a threat is fine. Military exercises and arming and training Ukrainians is fine. Actually going to war with Russia has to be an absolute last resort in response to an existential threat, and nothing less than an existential threat, because if there isn't one, war creates one. Don't the Ukrainians consider Russia launching a full scale invasion as an existential threat? It's not as if people are advocating a preemptive strike. They are advocating that there be the military capacity and will to thwart Russia's invasion into Ukraine, should that happen. I don't think people are even considering, for instance, an assault to return Crimea to Ukrainian rule or end the uprising in eastern Ukraine. A military response is only being contemplated if Russia crosses the line in the sand that is the current Ukrainian border.
An attempt to retake the breakaway regions by force is one of the most likely scenarios under which things would actually go from posturing to real conflict. Outside of playing WWII-analogy fantasy roleplaying, that might actually be one of the possibilities to actually watch for.
|
|
|
On January 26 2022 04:15 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2022 02:52 Doc.Rivers wrote:Good to see a healthy debate on the subject in this thread. Meanwhile, prominent liberal journalists are claiming that if you oppose US involvement in any war in Ukraine, you're a pro-Kremlin Russian asset. There's just something about the media and wars: + Show Spoiler + You are not calling Tucker a journalist with a straight face are you? The guy is by his own admission in the courts, satire.
Well he runs an opinion show so his lawyers can defeat a defamation claim in court (Maddow's lawyers successfully made the exact same argument). It's the BuzzFeed person expressing purely partisan opinions I am calling a journalist.
|
Ahahaha, you guys cannot even imagine how weird those russian political shows are nowadays, feels like straight from Orwells 1984, a real clownfiesta which is also poorly scripted
But frankly you should not consider such show seriously at all, as it targets rednecks by the local IQ standards and the eldest generations (and you can easily judge the target group based on the guests/hosts of the studio)
As a citizen of mostly russian-speaking city (everybody knows ukrainian and russian, there is a freedom of choice in public) in eastern border of Ukraine I can tell - no one wants liberation or be liberated here, we saw what happened in Donbass and nobody wants to live in a similar shothole after the liberation. We wanna live in peace and prosperity
National media are like in a few steps away from panic, but personally I don't believe in a full scale invasion for a couple of reasons. First of all - the local support, it's not what it used to be even in 2014, everything is shifted, as 90-95% of the locals will be pro EU. Secondly, this is not the first time in last years since russian troops were gathered on the borders, most likely they are trying to find a reason to lift some of the sanctions with such manuvours. So economic reasons also probably. I should also mention that local politicians also benefits from the fear of war in their own interests, but this is far lesser evil obviously. Last but not least it will trigget a huge refugee wave on Europe once again, that would be a complex social crisis.
In reality not many people are seeking for this way, neither ukrainians, nor average russian citizens, as we have many interconnections and relatives, so it's better to avoid the conflict as much as possible and do everything via diplomacy.
Don't want to imagine what happens in worst case scenario, invading a city with 2 mil pop which is unfriendly also...This might be a bloodbath. Next imagine trying to do something similar with Kyiv which is like 3 times bigger? And then I'll have like two options, to flee with the family (to join those refugee wave that was mentioned previously) or to stay and fight - both equally unpleasant, while all we want is to live enjoing the life and to rise our kids :/
Fingers crossed for the best
|
On January 26 2022 06:42 Dav1oN wrote:
Ahahaha, you guys cannot even imagine how weird those russian political shows are nowadays, feels like straight from Orwells 1984, a real clownfiesta which is also poorly scripted
They literally invite Kremlin-paid Poles, Americans etc. to say outrageous things in those shows and start (literal) fights. Those same people also write pro-Kremlin pieces for the local editions of Sputnik etc.
|
More of that cultural backslide, such horse shit. “Don’t Say Gay” Bill that prevents teachers from talking about LGBTQ+ stuff. That’s so fucked, this is how you mentally screw up a bunch of kids who will spend far too long afraid to be themselves because of this sort of gross stigmatization.
Hateful shitbags.
https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/590838-house-committee-in-florida-passes-dont-say-gay-bill
“This bill is about defending the most awesome responsibility a person can have: being a parent,” Florida state Rep. Joe Harding (R), who first introduced the bill, said Thursday. “That job can only be given to you by above.”
Harding’s bill, along with its companion bill introduced Tuesday by Florida state Sen. Dennis Baxley (R), would block teachers in Florida from talking about LGBTQ+ topics that are not “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.”
Other advocates have criticized the language of one of the Florida bill’s provisions, which would require educators and administrators to effectively “out” known LGBTQ+ students to their parents without their consent.
|
Harding’s bill, along with its companion bill introduced Tuesday by Florida state Sen. Dennis Baxley (R), would block teachers in Florida from talking about LGBTQ+ topics that are not “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.”
If this would be the legal text, then itd be the most useless text written. The appropriate age would be when the person starts feeling emotional and physical attraction toward another person, regardless of sex.
|
On January 26 2022 20:54 plated.rawr wrote:Show nested quote +Harding’s bill, along with its companion bill introduced Tuesday by Florida state Sen. Dennis Baxley (R), would block teachers in Florida from talking about LGBTQ+ topics that are not “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.” If this would be the legal text, then itd be the most useless text written. The appropriate age would be when the person starts feeling emotional and physical attraction toward another person, regardless of sex.
Bold of you to assume Republicans care one lick about drawing that line based on science/medicine. Remember that many of these folks insist that abstinence is the only proper sex ed.
|
That is the US. Meaning juries of hillbillies and conservative appointed judges deciding your fate.
I am pretty sure that to 95% of the teachers, this means "I don't talk about this in class." Because you don't want to risk losing your job and potentially get into legal trouble over it. Some teachers may be willing to risk everything for their ideals, but most are just people doing their jobs.
|
|
|
Breyer retiring is enormous news. I can’t imagine Sinema and Manchin actually tank this but who knows
|
SCOTUS Justice Breyer is said to be retiring according to the NYT. Expectations are that Biden will nominate Ketanji Brown Jackson, a D.C. appeals court judge, to fulfil a promise to nominate a black woman.
|
I am listening to a podcast about the american revolution; they mention how Washington thought the one thing the new republic had to avoid at all cost was partisan politics.
Oh George…
|
That is one of the thousands of pieces of evidence we have that the "founding fathers" were plain and simply not exceptional people. Their words were never holy. They were not prophets. They were people living in 1776. It is hard to understate how much less knowledgeable we were in all forms of philosophy, government, science, everything, in 1776. They did their best, and did great all things considered, but we are fools for gripping so tightly to the systems they created.
Imagine if we manufactured electronics using methods from 1776. Imagine if we treated cancer patients using methods from 1776. Manufacturing? Flight? Communication?
They did great for 1776 and laughably poorly for 2022.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 27 2022 02:26 PhoenixVoid wrote:SCOTUS Justice Breyer is said to be retiring according to the NYT. Expectations are that Biden will nominate Ketanji Brown Jackson, a D.C. appeals court judge, to fulfil a promise to nominate a black woman.
As with the VP pick, the framing here sucks. Would be better to look to nominate a top-tier legal expert who happens to be a black woman, rather than explicitly making it clear that the diversity quota, not quality of work, is the goal.
|
On January 27 2022 04:03 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2022 02:26 PhoenixVoid wrote:SCOTUS Justice Breyer is said to be retiring according to the NYT. Expectations are that Biden will nominate Ketanji Brown Jackson, a D.C. appeals court judge, to fulfil a promise to nominate a black woman. As with the VP pick, the framing here sucks. Would be better to look to nominate a top-tier legal expert who happens to be a black woman, rather than explicitly making it clear that the diversity quota, not quality of work, is the goal.
Agreed completely. He had no real incentive to be like "affirmative action FUCKING RULES!!!" about it. Just nominate the black woman and score the points anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
