|
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 |
Indication from State is these flights were authorized, which was withdrawn while in the air by Petro, and immediately posted this unhinged rant parroting global leftist talking points as an excuse not to fulfill basic international duties while making himself a star for taking on the big bad fascist:
+ Show Spoiler +Trump, I don't really like travelling to the US. It's a bit boring, but I confess that there are some commendable things. I like going to the Black neighborhoods of Washington, where I saw a fight in the US capital between Blacks and Latinos with barricades, which seemed like nonsense to me, because they should join together.
I confess that I like Walt Whitman and Paul Simon and Noam Chomsky and Miller.
I confess that Sacco and Vanzetti, who have my blood, are memorable in the history of the USA and I follow them. They were murdered by labor leaders in the electric chair, by the fascists who are within the USA as well as within my country.
I don't like your oil, Trump. It's going to wipe out the human species because of greed. Maybe one day, with a glass of whiskey that I accept, despite my gastritis, we can talk frankly about this, but it's difficult because you consider me part of an inferior race and I'm not, nor is any Colombian.
So, if you know someone who is stubborn, that's me, period. You can try to carry out a coup with your economic strength and your arrogance, like they did with Allende. But I will die true to my principles, I resisted torture and I resist you. I don't want slavers next in Colombia, we already had many and we freed ourselves. What I want next in Colombia are lovers of freedom. If you can't join me, I'll go elsewhere. Colombia is the heart of the world, and you didn't understand that, this is the land of the yellow butterflies, of the beauty of Remedios, but also of the colonels like Aureliano Buendía, of which I am one, perhaps the last.
You will kill me, but I will survive in my people, which lives, before yours, in the Americas. We are peoples of the winds, the mountains, the Caribbean Sea and of freedom.
You don't like our freedom, okay. I don't shake hands with White slavers. I shake hands with the White libertarian heirs of Lincoln and the Black and White farm boys of the USA, at whose graves I cried and prayed on a battlefield, which I reached after walking the mountains of Italian Tuscany and after being saved from Covid.
They are the United States, and before them I kneel, before no one else.
Overthrow me, Mr. President, and the Americas and humanity will respond.
Colombia now stops looking north, it looks at the world. Our blood comes from the blood of the Caliphate of Cordoba, the civilization of that time, of the Roman Latins of the Mediterranean, the civilization of that time, who founded the republic, democracy in Athens; our blood comes from the Black resistance fighters turned into slaves by you. Colombia is the first free territory of America, before Washington, [before] of all America, and I take refuge in its African songs.
My land is made up of goldsmiths who worked in the time of the Egyptian pharaohs and of the first artists in the world in Chiribiquete.
You will never rule us. You're opposed to the warrior who rode our lands, shouting freedom, whose name is (Simon) Bolívar.
Our people are somewhat fearful, somewhat timid, they are naive and kind, loving, but they will know how to win the Panama Canal, which you took from us with violence. Two hundred heroes from all of Latin America lie in Bocas del Toro, today's Panama, formerly Colombia, which you murdered.
I raise a flag and as (Jorge Eliecer) Gaitán said, even if it remains alone, it will continue to be raised with the Latin American dignity that is the dignity of America, which your great-grandfather did not know, and mine did, Mr. President, an immigrant in the USA.
Your blockade does not scare me, because Colombia, besides being the country of beauty, is the heart of the world. I know that you love beauty as I do, do not disrespect it and it will give its sweetness to you.
FROM TODAY ON, COLOMBIA IS OPEN TO THE ENTIRE WORLD, WITH OPEN ARMS, WE ARE BUILDERS OF FREEDOM, LIFE AND HUMANITY.
I am informed that you impose a 50% tariff on the fruits of our human labor to enter the United States, and I do the same.
Let our people plant corn that was discovered in Colombia and feed the world.
No indication there was any agreement specifying one kind and color of airplane and proscribing the use of another, just this guy very clearly being the one to start shit first because he thought the planes made his citizens seem like criminals, and also he wouldn't take his citizens, who are not criminals, back.
Hopefully any other koolaid-drinking leader who thinks basic remigration of illegals is something to make a ridiculous spectacle about, will reconsider the consequences of being made to "publicly lose" beforehand. Probably next on the list of incidents will be Haiti, whose "leader" says that Haitians returning to Haiti could be catastrophic.
He relented so fast after threatening to start a trade war (hopefully advised by a sane person in Colombia's government or his circle) that AOC was still on social networks explaining her shtick to MAGA why tariffs are bad when the news came he agreed to cooperate.
|
On January 28 2025 03:29 oBlade wrote:Indication from State is these flights were authorized, which was withdrawn while in the air by Petro, and immediately posted this unhinged rant parroting global leftist talking points as an excuse not to fulfill basic international duties while making himself a star for taking on the big bad fascist: + Show Spoiler +Trump, I don't really like travelling to the US. It's a bit boring, but I confess that there are some commendable things. I like going to the Black neighborhoods of Washington, where I saw a fight in the US capital between Blacks and Latinos with barricades, which seemed like nonsense to me, because they should join together.
I confess that I like Walt Whitman and Paul Simon and Noam Chomsky and Miller.
I confess that Sacco and Vanzetti, who have my blood, are memorable in the history of the USA and I follow them. They were murdered by labor leaders in the electric chair, by the fascists who are within the USA as well as within my country.
I don't like your oil, Trump. It's going to wipe out the human species because of greed. Maybe one day, with a glass of whiskey that I accept, despite my gastritis, we can talk frankly about this, but it's difficult because you consider me part of an inferior race and I'm not, nor is any Colombian.
So, if you know someone who is stubborn, that's me, period. You can try to carry out a coup with your economic strength and your arrogance, like they did with Allende. But I will die true to my principles, I resisted torture and I resist you. I don't want slavers next in Colombia, we already had many and we freed ourselves. What I want next in Colombia are lovers of freedom. If you can't join me, I'll go elsewhere. Colombia is the heart of the world, and you didn't understand that, this is the land of the yellow butterflies, of the beauty of Remedios, but also of the colonels like Aureliano Buendía, of which I am one, perhaps the last.
You will kill me, but I will survive in my people, which lives, before yours, in the Americas. We are peoples of the winds, the mountains, the Caribbean Sea and of freedom.
You don't like our freedom, okay. I don't shake hands with White slavers. I shake hands with the White libertarian heirs of Lincoln and the Black and White farm boys of the USA, at whose graves I cried and prayed on a battlefield, which I reached after walking the mountains of Italian Tuscany and after being saved from Covid.
They are the United States, and before them I kneel, before no one else.
Overthrow me, Mr. President, and the Americas and humanity will respond.
Colombia now stops looking north, it looks at the world. Our blood comes from the blood of the Caliphate of Cordoba, the civilization of that time, of the Roman Latins of the Mediterranean, the civilization of that time, who founded the republic, democracy in Athens; our blood comes from the Black resistance fighters turned into slaves by you. Colombia is the first free territory of America, before Washington, [before] of all America, and I take refuge in its African songs.
My land is made up of goldsmiths who worked in the time of the Egyptian pharaohs and of the first artists in the world in Chiribiquete.
You will never rule us. You're opposed to the warrior who rode our lands, shouting freedom, whose name is (Simon) Bolívar.
Our people are somewhat fearful, somewhat timid, they are naive and kind, loving, but they will know how to win the Panama Canal, which you took from us with violence. Two hundred heroes from all of Latin America lie in Bocas del Toro, today's Panama, formerly Colombia, which you murdered.
I raise a flag and as (Jorge Eliecer) Gaitán said, even if it remains alone, it will continue to be raised with the Latin American dignity that is the dignity of America, which your great-grandfather did not know, and mine did, Mr. President, an immigrant in the USA.
Your blockade does not scare me, because Colombia, besides being the country of beauty, is the heart of the world. I know that you love beauty as I do, do not disrespect it and it will give its sweetness to you.
FROM TODAY ON, COLOMBIA IS OPEN TO THE ENTIRE WORLD, WITH OPEN ARMS, WE ARE BUILDERS OF FREEDOM, LIFE AND HUMANITY.
I am informed that you impose a 50% tariff on the fruits of our human labor to enter the United States, and I do the same.
Let our people plant corn that was discovered in Colombia and feed the world. No indication there was any agreement specifying one kind and color of airplane and proscribing the use of another, just this guy very clearly being the one to start shit first because he thought the planes made his citizens seem like criminals, and also he wouldn't take his citizens, who are not criminals, back. Hopefully any other koolaid-drinking leader who thinks basic remigration of illegals is something to make a ridiculous spectacle about, will reconsider the consequences of being made to "publicly lose" beforehand. Probably next on the list of incidents will be Haiti, whose "leader" says that Haitians returning to Haiti could be catastrophic.
Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "global leftist talking points"?
|
Does his diatribe sound right wing to you?
|
On January 28 2025 03:35 oBlade wrote:
Does his diatribe sound right wing to you?
That's a false dichotomy. Not every statement is necessarily left wing or right wing. Which parts of his statement would you consider to be "global leftist talking points", and why?
|
United States43866 Posts
They were approved when the assumption of the Colombian government was that it was a routine flight, exactly like the hundreds of others in the past few years. This was never about whether Colombia was willing to take their citizens back, they were and are.
Trump's state department unilaterally broke the agreement and released footage of Colombian citizens in shackles being loaded onto military planes. It was a deliberate attempt by Trump to pick a fight and it succeeded and yet Oblade is here insisting Petro made it into a spectacle. It's weird that they randomly decided to make a fuss for no reason on the same day that the US decided to break the agreement and also release footage of Colombians in shackles. We may never learn what they were so triggered by.
Trump's team is attempting to spin this as a deportation success, despite the fact that those people would have been successfully deported under Biden without a fight. It's absolutely not about whether Colombia would take these people back, or remigration, or any other immigration buzzword nonsense.
Winning is apparently when you have to fight to get what you already had.
|
On January 28 2025 03:56 KwarK wrote:
They were approved when the assumption of the Colombian government was that it was a routine flight, exactly like the hundreds of others in the past few years. This was never about whether Colombia was willing to take their citizens back, they were and are.
Trump's state department unilaterally broke the agreement and released footage of Colombian citizens in shackles being loaded onto military planes. It was a deliberate attempt by Trump to pick a fight and it succeeded and yet Oblade is here insisting Petro made it into a spectacle. It's weird that they randomly decided to make a fuss for no reason on the same day that the US decided to break the agreement and also release footage of Colombians in shackles. We may never learn what they were so triggered by.
Trump's team is attempting to spin this as a deportation success, despite the fact that those people would have been successfully deported under Biden without a fight. It's absolutely not about whether Colombia would take these people back, or remigration, or any other immigration buzzword nonsense.
Winning is apparently when you have to fight to get what you already had.
Perhaps you have the text of the agreement? With the "no military airplanes" and "no footage of the US government doing US government business" clauses? Since those were stipulations.
If not - maybe it was an unwritten, informal agreement - perhaps the source from a diplomat or insider or official confirming your claim?
Even better - can you help me find the released footage of Colombians in shackles. Please make sure it's the right one and not the C17s with Guatemalan deportees, or the other deportees that were sent to Brazil and filmed by a random guy. Which by the way that's weird Guatemala didn't make such a stink - Maybe they had already negotiated a different agreement beforehand that didn't preclude the use of US planes to deport migrants from the US - but since the key issue here seems to have been "Colombian" dignity where was that footage again?
|
United States43866 Posts
On January 28 2025 04:24 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2025 03:56 KwarK wrote:
They were approved when the assumption of the Colombian government was that it was a routine flight, exactly like the hundreds of others in the past few years. This was never about whether Colombia was willing to take their citizens back, they were and are.
Trump's state department unilaterally broke the agreement and released footage of Colombian citizens in shackles being loaded onto military planes. It was a deliberate attempt by Trump to pick a fight and it succeeded and yet Oblade is here insisting Petro made it into a spectacle. It's weird that they randomly decided to make a fuss for no reason on the same day that the US decided to break the agreement and also release footage of Colombians in shackles. We may never learn what they were so triggered by.
Trump's team is attempting to spin this as a deportation success, despite the fact that those people would have been successfully deported under Biden without a fight. It's absolutely not about whether Colombia would take these people back, or remigration, or any other immigration buzzword nonsense.
Winning is apparently when you have to fight to get what you already had. Perhaps you have the text of the agreement? With the "no military airplanes" and "no footage of the US government doing US government business" clauses? Since those were stipulations. If not - maybe it was an unwritten, informal agreement - perhaps the source from a diplomat or insider or official confirming your claim? Even better - can you help me find the released footage of Colombians in shackles. Please make sure it's the right one and not the C17s with Guatemalan deportees, or the other deportees that were sent to Brazil and filmed by a random guy. Which by the way that's weird Guatemala didn't make such a stink - Maybe they had already negotiated a different agreement beforehand that didn't preclude the use of US planes to deport migrants from the US - but since the key issue here seems to have been "Colombian" dignity where was that footage again?
Is your point here that there are photos of the shackled deportees being loaded onto military planes and that the Colombians were shackled and loaded onto military planes but the specific photo did not depict the Colombians?
Seems a weird point. If I'm understanding correctly you're acknowledging the deportees, including Colombians, were shackled and loaded onto military planes and you're acknowledging that there are photos of this but you're contending that the specific photo didn't specifically show the Colombians, it just generally showed what was being done to all the deportees including Colombians.
If that's your point you may need to find a better one.
|
My point is photos of people on a plane bound for Guatemala would not be photos of Colombians, my compatriot, that you just claimed the US unilaterally broke the agreement of by releasing footage of Colombians (you specified State Department but I'm willing to grant the effect would be the same whether the footage of Colombians was released by the WH or DHS or anyone). And used that as the cause underlying and justifying Petro's actions here and implicating the US.
Barring that you can find that, show said agreement. That'd be more helpful. Clearly a just president would take issue with his citizens being shackled and put on military planes to begin with, not merely pretending to be outraged only if evidence of same were to be broadcast (but since you think the "footage" was one of the keystones then perhaps we can agree he's not a just president).
The good news is if there really was an agreement not to use military planes, and now they're able to use military planes, then Blumpf really did achieve something. Know why?
1) ICE has 12 aircraft. The DoD has thousands of aircraft. Are you able to achieve more, have more leeway, using 12 aircraft or 12 + up to thousands?
2) Are people more likely to immigrate illegally when they know they'll maybe eventually possibly get deported in a cushy charter jet, or immediately in a military asset?
|
On January 28 2025 04:52 oBlade wrote:
Blumpf really did achieve something. Know why?
Because of global leftist talking points, obviously.
|
On January 28 2025 04:30 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2025 04:24 oBlade wrote:On January 28 2025 03:56 KwarK wrote:
They were approved when the assumption of the Colombian government was that it was a routine flight, exactly like the hundreds of others in the past few years. This was never about whether Colombia was willing to take their citizens back, they were and are.
Trump's state department unilaterally broke the agreement and released footage of Colombian citizens in shackles being loaded onto military planes. It was a deliberate attempt by Trump to pick a fight and it succeeded and yet Oblade is here insisting Petro made it into a spectacle. It's weird that they randomly decided to make a fuss for no reason on the same day that the US decided to break the agreement and also release footage of Colombians in shackles. We may never learn what they were so triggered by.
Trump's team is attempting to spin this as a deportation success, despite the fact that those people would have been successfully deported under Biden without a fight. It's absolutely not about whether Colombia would take these people back, or remigration, or any other immigration buzzword nonsense.
Winning is apparently when you have to fight to get what you already had. Perhaps you have the text of the agreement? With the "no military airplanes" and "no footage of the US government doing US government business" clauses? Since those were stipulations. If not - maybe it was an unwritten, informal agreement - perhaps the source from a diplomat or insider or official confirming your claim? Even better - can you help me find the released footage of Colombians in shackles. Please make sure it's the right one and not the C17s with Guatemalan deportees, or the other deportees that were sent to Brazil and filmed by a random guy. Which by the way that's weird Guatemala didn't make such a stink - Maybe they had already negotiated a different agreement beforehand that didn't preclude the use of US planes to deport migrants from the US - but since the key issue here seems to have been "Colombian" dignity where was that footage again? Is your point here that there are photos of the shackled deportees being loaded onto military planes and that the Colombians were shackled and loaded onto military planes but the specific photo did not depict the Colombians? Seems a weird point. If I'm understanding correctly you're acknowledging the deportees, including Colombians, were shackled and loaded onto military planes and you're acknowledging that there are photos of this but you're contending that the specific photo didn't specifically show the Colombians, it just generally showed what was being done to all the deportees including Colombians. If that's your point you may need to find a better one.
So your argument is that Trump "picked a fight" with Colombia by showing photos of Brazilians being deported to Brazil and the President with low approval ratings defiantly ranting on twitter about standing up to the "white colonists" is just an unwilling combatant with a gun being shoved in his face?
|
United States43866 Posts
On January 28 2025 05:10 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2025 04:30 KwarK wrote:On January 28 2025 04:24 oBlade wrote:On January 28 2025 03:56 KwarK wrote:
They were approved when the assumption of the Colombian government was that it was a routine flight, exactly like the hundreds of others in the past few years. This was never about whether Colombia was willing to take their citizens back, they were and are.
Trump's state department unilaterally broke the agreement and released footage of Colombian citizens in shackles being loaded onto military planes. It was a deliberate attempt by Trump to pick a fight and it succeeded and yet Oblade is here insisting Petro made it into a spectacle. It's weird that they randomly decided to make a fuss for no reason on the same day that the US decided to break the agreement and also release footage of Colombians in shackles. We may never learn what they were so triggered by.
Trump's team is attempting to spin this as a deportation success, despite the fact that those people would have been successfully deported under Biden without a fight. It's absolutely not about whether Colombia would take these people back, or remigration, or any other immigration buzzword nonsense.
Winning is apparently when you have to fight to get what you already had. Perhaps you have the text of the agreement? With the "no military airplanes" and "no footage of the US government doing US government business" clauses? Since those were stipulations. If not - maybe it was an unwritten, informal agreement - perhaps the source from a diplomat or insider or official confirming your claim? Even better - can you help me find the released footage of Colombians in shackles. Please make sure it's the right one and not the C17s with Guatemalan deportees, or the other deportees that were sent to Brazil and filmed by a random guy. Which by the way that's weird Guatemala didn't make such a stink - Maybe they had already negotiated a different agreement beforehand that didn't preclude the use of US planes to deport migrants from the US - but since the key issue here seems to have been "Colombian" dignity where was that footage again? Is your point here that there are photos of the shackled deportees being loaded onto military planes and that the Colombians were shackled and loaded onto military planes but the specific photo did not depict the Colombians? Seems a weird point. If I'm understanding correctly you're acknowledging the deportees, including Colombians, were shackled and loaded onto military planes and you're acknowledging that there are photos of this but you're contending that the specific photo didn't specifically show the Colombians, it just generally showed what was being done to all the deportees including Colombians. If that's your point you may need to find a better one. So your argument is that Trump "picked a fight" with Colombia by showing photos of Brazilians being deported to Brazil and the President with low approval ratings defiantly ranting on twitter about standing up to the "white colonists" is just an unwilling combatant with a gun being shoved in his face?
I'm saying that Trump picked a fight by taking an existing working deportation (or remigration for those of you who only speak Orwellian newspeak) policy and adding pointless theatre. That the countries were already happily accepting their citizens back and that the abrupt addition of the shackles and military aircraft to Colombian citizens, among others, was picking a fight. That in any other era the disagreement would have been settled by emails between relevant state department officials and that settling it publicly with a series of ultimatums harmed the US, regardless of how much magats might cheer it.
If we compare the situation today to the one 3 days ago what exactly has Trump won? The people were going back before and they're still going back, is it just shackles?
It's pulling a gun in a Waffle House over petty bullshit. A bunch of Starbucks management likely had to pull an all nighter over this shit and are certainly now engaging in a lot of spreadsheeting bullshit over how to mitigate potential supply disruptions and the additional warehousing/infrastructure needed etc. And every other company that imports anything has to be ready to deal with the same possible disruption happening at a moment's notice.
|
On January 28 2025 05:22 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2025 05:10 BlackJack wrote:On January 28 2025 04:30 KwarK wrote:On January 28 2025 04:24 oBlade wrote:On January 28 2025 03:56 KwarK wrote:
They were approved when the assumption of the Colombian government was that it was a routine flight, exactly like the hundreds of others in the past few years. This was never about whether Colombia was willing to take their citizens back, they were and are.
Trump's state department unilaterally broke the agreement and released footage of Colombian citizens in shackles being loaded onto military planes. It was a deliberate attempt by Trump to pick a fight and it succeeded and yet Oblade is here insisting Petro made it into a spectacle. It's weird that they randomly decided to make a fuss for no reason on the same day that the US decided to break the agreement and also release footage of Colombians in shackles. We may never learn what they were so triggered by.
Trump's team is attempting to spin this as a deportation success, despite the fact that those people would have been successfully deported under Biden without a fight. It's absolutely not about whether Colombia would take these people back, or remigration, or any other immigration buzzword nonsense.
Winning is apparently when you have to fight to get what you already had. Perhaps you have the text of the agreement? With the "no military airplanes" and "no footage of the US government doing US government business" clauses? Since those were stipulations. If not - maybe it was an unwritten, informal agreement - perhaps the source from a diplomat or insider or official confirming your claim? Even better - can you help me find the released footage of Colombians in shackles. Please make sure it's the right one and not the C17s with Guatemalan deportees, or the other deportees that were sent to Brazil and filmed by a random guy. Which by the way that's weird Guatemala didn't make such a stink - Maybe they had already negotiated a different agreement beforehand that didn't preclude the use of US planes to deport migrants from the US - but since the key issue here seems to have been "Colombian" dignity where was that footage again? Is your point here that there are photos of the shackled deportees being loaded onto military planes and that the Colombians were shackled and loaded onto military planes but the specific photo did not depict the Colombians? Seems a weird point. If I'm understanding correctly you're acknowledging the deportees, including Colombians, were shackled and loaded onto military planes and you're acknowledging that there are photos of this but you're contending that the specific photo didn't specifically show the Colombians, it just generally showed what was being done to all the deportees including Colombians. If that's your point you may need to find a better one. So your argument is that Trump "picked a fight" with Colombia by showing photos of Brazilians being deported to Brazil and the President with low approval ratings defiantly ranting on twitter about standing up to the "white colonists" is just an unwilling combatant with a gun being shoved in his face? I'm saying that Trump picked a fight by taking an existing working deportation (or remigration for those of you who only speak Orwellian newspeak) policy and adding pointless theatre. That the countries were already happily accepting their citizens back and that the abrupt addition of the shackles and military aircraft to Colombian citizens, among others, was picking a fight. That in any other era the disagreement would have been settled by emails between relevant state department officials and that settling it publicly with a series of ultimatums harmed the US, regardless of how much magats might cheer it. If we compare the situation today to the one 3 days ago what exactly has Trump won? The people were going back before and they're still going back, is it just shackles? It's pulling a gun in a Waffle House over petty bullshit. A bunch of Starbucks management likely had to pull an all nighter over this shit and are certainly now engaging in a lot of spreadsheeting bullshit over how to mitigate potential supply disruptions and the additional warehousing/infrastructure needed etc. And every other company that imports anything has to be ready to deal with the same possible disruption happening at a moment's notice.
I might actually agree with you if it didn't take 2 minutes of googling to find a plethora of articles of migrants being deported in shackles under Obama
https://www.npr.org/2010/07/28/128826285/under-obama-more-illegal-immigrants-sent-home
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/07/26/128772646/deportations-higher-under-obama-than-bush
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/us/more-deportations-follow-minor-crimes-data-shows.html
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/27/south-asian-migrants-body-bags-deportation-us
But of course now is the time to be outraged by migrants being deported in shackles. The mainstream media says jump and you say how high. It's like when photographs of "kids in cages" circulated blaming Trump's policies only to later discover the photos were taken under Obama's administration. Whoops.
Surely this is not an instance of a President with a 34% approval rating trying to reverse his political dire straits by manufacturing a rally-around-the-flag effect of standing up to the white colonist imperialists. It must be Trump picking a fight by doing the same kind of stuff Obama did but didn't cause outrage at the time.
|
Although I do agree that immediately going on Trump twitter and announcing tariffs on a country over such a minor spat is terrible foreign policy and a gift to China
|
United States43866 Posts
I don’t think it was ever claimed that nobody was ever shackled before this week. Presumably violent and otherwise uncontrollable deportees always were. This isn’t really a gotcha, if you thought my argument was that Trump invented shackles then I guess you beat it but that wasn’t it.
He was demanding basic decency. One of the other demands Petro made was that Colombians be given water when it’s hot, for example.
It also doesn’t make a huge amount of difference to my point which was that pulling a gun in a Waffle House argument is idiotic and makes everyone want to steer the fuck clear of you. Let’s say the other guy said something first and initiated the argument. It’s still not a good idea to immediately escalate to the moon so that everyone knows how tough you are and how much of a pussy the other guy is. This still could have all been an email rather than a series of back and forth ultimatums through the night. “Actually he started it” doesn’t change my opinion on the situation.
That’s not to say I accept Petro started it, just that it doesn’t actually make a difference. Trump’s ‘arbitrarily and disproportionately escalate and compel surrender’ style of diplomacy is ineffective regardless of who started it.
|
United States43866 Posts
On January 28 2025 07:45 BlackJack wrote:
Although I do agree that immediately going on Trump twitter and announcing tariffs on a country over such a minor spat is terrible foreign policy and a gift to China
Genuinely surprised by this post which makes a paragraph I wrote unnecessary because we agree?
|
I feel like the large majority of objections I make on this site are done on narrow grounds to combat my perception of one-sided storytelling
|
On January 28 2025 08:45 BlackJack wrote:
I feel like the large majority of objections I make on this site are done on narrow grounds to combat my perception of one-sided storytelling
That's a euphemistic way of saying you hyperfocus on irrelevant minutiae, but good on you for owning up to it.
|
On January 28 2025 09:20 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2025 08:45 BlackJack wrote:
I feel like the large majority of objections I make on this site are done on narrow grounds to combat my perception of one-sided storytelling That's a euphemistic way of saying you hyperfocus on irrelevant minutiae, but good on you for owning up to it.
The relevance is subjective. Dispelling a myth that police are genociding black people doesn’t mean that I disagree with a larger contention that black people suffer discrimination from the police. Likewise the fact that we “both agree” that black people suffer discrimination doesn’t make it an “irrelevant minutiae” whether they are being genocided. The prescription for what to do about said discrimination is likely to be disproportionate for someone trying to stop genocide. Although I can understand how my narrow objections can be seen as an annoying nitpicking and an unwelcome interruption to the echo chamber that’s strived for here.
|
Its not an echo chamber. Its not always clear that you agree in principle but want to get the facts right.
Quite often it feels like trying to poke at small things to imply the entire argument is bunk.
|
More like making sure people know they're not perfect. I know perfectly well that I'm not perfect and I'm aware of plenty of my mistakes without people like BJ rubbing it in my face for very odd reasons and awkwardly asking for a 'thank you' afterwards.
Does BJ know that he's also not perfect? I don't get the impression that he does. Haven't seen him admit to anything literally in years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
