|
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 15 2026 04:04 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2026 03:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 15 2026 02:59 KwarK wrote:On January 15 2026 01:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 14 2026 20:28 KwarK wrote:On January 14 2026 20:10 Sadist wrote:On January 14 2026 19:05 Gorsameth wrote:
Yes the fact senior lawyers of the DOJ civil rights department are resigning over a refusal to investigate the agent who shot Good shows they could, but won't.
ICE are federal agents and the federal government can investigate them. But logically Trump doesn't want his SS troops prosecuted for shooting the right people.
And we can assume they shooting the right people because Trump got very upset at Iran for shooting what he called the wrong people.
So there are right people to shoot, US citizens protesting his regime, and wrong people, Iranians protesting their regime. They need to stop resigning. A lackey will take their place and just do the governments bidding and we will be further down the slide towards authortarianism. Might as well argue concentration camp guards shouldn’t resign because they’ll just be replaced by men with better marksmanship. At a certain point all you can do is refuse to participate. At what point does this apply to Democrats in Congress*? That’s a dumb question that somehow fails to see the difference between the civil servants working for the Trump administration and the opposing party fighting the Trump administration. You might be an idiot. Maybe show a doctor the post you just made and see if you can get tested. Setting aside your petulant lashing out... I acknowledged that they are different with different thresholds. At some point, they cease functionally being "the opposing party fighting the Trump administration" and become some version of "the functionaries of the Trump administration" or they reach the same point as the civil servants that can only refuse to participate. I'm asking people when they think that might be. Clearly you don't think failing to shutdown the government in the context of ICE (and everything else) qualifies. GH, I really wish you could try to think in real politik way, because, as you can see, your insistence on demonizing the only people who can deliver back a version of America that is not incredibly fascist and imperialist without crazy amount of bloodshed is really grating on the vast majority of people around here. Many folks so far provided their structured, measured and thought out views on why the shutdown might be good or bad, it's silly to go down Murphy's law about them when there are actual fascist doing nazi shit out and about. + Show Spoiler +Realistically, the way that a country that has essentially been a relative police state even before all of this shit where Law enforcement is treated as infallible can't have a "revolution" without half the country supporting murdering of protesters, which in turn ensures deaths in the LEO ranks which in turns results in army getting involved, elections being canceled and Trump staying in power forever.
The accelerationists have always been stupid, to me it seems like you were / are one of them, and despite how many times you are proven that America can't just change and have a multi-party system emerge out of the blue fixing the fascism problem you just keep doubling down, it's silly man .
You want me to come up with a way for Democrats, who everyone finally knows/agrees with me are hopeless, have no plan, and no way to effectuate it if they did, to fix this. That's silly.
"the opposing party fighting the Trump administration" or "a functionary of the Trump administration" which one is Fetterman? Was Manchin? Sinema, Eric Adams? Any of the other Democrats that sided with the Trump admin to end the last shutdown?
What does/would it take to stop identifying a Democrat as "fighting Trump" and identify them as "Trump's functionary" instead?
If DOJ attorneys and Micronesias around the government have to look at their job every day and figure out if they are "fighting the Trump administration" or "a functionary of the Trump administration" I believe politicians should too.
|
On January 15 2026 05:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2026 02:21 GreenHorizons wrote:Regardless of how the potential shutdown goes (I agree with Kwark/Jankisa/Acro that Democrats should/need to shutdown the government for at least what they're currently calling for, but won't/can't, hence the follow up), I think communities protecting themselves like this will be necessary. That's great the community defended themselves from another potential kidnapping / murder / unjustified attack. The community kind of got lucky that those specific ICE agents didn't decide to start spraying them with bullets though, pretending that the agents' lives were being threatened. I guess the wall of protective community members is the best we can hope for, wherever there's insufficient/no accountability at the local/state levels for attacks by ICE agents. I'm hoping that non-violent walls of community members are effective enough, but I can also see a hypothetical escalation by Trump's gestapo where community members might need to start exercising their 2nd Amendment rights against ICE too. Hopefully it doesn't come to that.
A 21st century Boston Massacre happening is all but certain (provided people continue to oppose fascism) at this point imo.
If it happens to contain the right mix of people (need a war vet, a [straight cis] woman, and a child probably) being murdered, maybe it swings things in favor of the "patriots" over the "loyalists".
|
United States43725 Posts
GH I think you need a dictionary.
|
On January 15 2026 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2026 06:00 Vivax wrote:On January 15 2026 05:39 Gorsameth wrote:On January 15 2026 04:20 Vivax wrote:On January 15 2026 04:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Those fucking lunatics are really going to attack greenland. Jesus i hate so much everyone who voted that bastard in power. He‘s playing both sides basically. After forcing Europeans to cut ties with Russia, he tried to de-escalate with them and escalated with the EU instead. You‘d think that he wanted to leave worldwide conflict as a legacy before kicking the bucket. His comments about Monroe Doctrine or his own (sigh) Donroe Doctrine gives a peek into his thinking in this case I think. It basically comes down to 'The America's belong to US and everyone else should GTFO'. Which was a little more understandable in the 1800's with colonialism still existing. He wants Greenland because Europe shouldn't own anything in the America's. Venezuela's oil is his because everything in the America's is his. Now clearly Trump himself didn't think of this. The notion that he reads... anything is ludicrous so someone told him about it, someone that wants to own, through the US, Greenland's resources. (Peter Theil?) For all the Republican talk about Biden being just a puppet they immediately voted in a puppet of their own. As always, every accusation is a confession. How is Greenland the Americas even. About as much as Iceland. Definitely less the Americas than Cuba. Yeah Thiel fantasized about building some kind of exclave for billionaires there… If it were about resources then the master deal maker could try to negotiate something that doesn‘t involve putting the security of hundreds of millions at risk. How long would the exploitation even last at the current rate of consumption in the US ? That‘s already a deal breaker. The average wish for an average person is sustainability and security, not geopolitical high stakes poker to please a handful of extremely wasteful billionaires at the expense of the major population. At some point he‘s got to face that a recession has to happen instead of supergluing the gas pedal at any cost. Greenland resides on the North American continental plate.
We'd better not tell Trump about the existence of Martinique, French Guyana or the Falklands then.
|
On January 15 2026 08:30 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2026 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On January 15 2026 06:00 Vivax wrote:On January 15 2026 05:39 Gorsameth wrote:On January 15 2026 04:20 Vivax wrote:On January 15 2026 04:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Those fucking lunatics are really going to attack greenland. Jesus i hate so much everyone who voted that bastard in power. He‘s playing both sides basically. After forcing Europeans to cut ties with Russia, he tried to de-escalate with them and escalated with the EU instead. You‘d think that he wanted to leave worldwide conflict as a legacy before kicking the bucket. His comments about Monroe Doctrine or his own (sigh) Donroe Doctrine gives a peek into his thinking in this case I think. It basically comes down to 'The America's belong to US and everyone else should GTFO'. Which was a little more understandable in the 1800's with colonialism still existing. He wants Greenland because Europe shouldn't own anything in the America's. Venezuela's oil is his because everything in the America's is his. Now clearly Trump himself didn't think of this. The notion that he reads... anything is ludicrous so someone told him about it, someone that wants to own, through the US, Greenland's resources. (Peter Theil?) For all the Republican talk about Biden being just a puppet they immediately voted in a puppet of their own. As always, every accusation is a confession. How is Greenland the Americas even. About as much as Iceland. Definitely less the Americas than Cuba. Yeah Thiel fantasized about building some kind of exclave for billionaires there… If it were about resources then the master deal maker could try to negotiate something that doesn‘t involve putting the security of hundreds of millions at risk. How long would the exploitation even last at the current rate of consumption in the US ? That‘s already a deal breaker. The average wish for an average person is sustainability and security, not geopolitical high stakes poker to please a handful of extremely wasteful billionaires at the expense of the major population. At some point he‘s got to face that a recession has to happen instead of supergluing the gas pedal at any cost. Greenland resides on the North American continental plate. We'd better not tell Trump about the existence of Martinique, French Guyana or the Falklands then.
Trump doesn't even know that he's already the president of Puerto Rico, so maybe he'll try to conquer Puerto Rico next.
|
It looks like they've resorted to fabricating injuries to justify attacks made by ICE. This is about as believable as Trump's doctors reporting that he's the pinnacle of presidential health.
"Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who fatally shot Renee Nicole Good on Jan. 7, suffered internal bleeding to the torso, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin confirmed to Fox News on Wednesday."
https://www.fox5ny.com/news/jonathan-ross-injuries-renee-good-jan-14-2026
|
On January 15 2026 12:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:It looks like they've resorted to fabricating injuries to justify attacks made by ICE. This is about as believable as Trump's doctors reporting that he's the pinnacle of presidential health. "Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who fatally shot Renee Nicole Good on Jan. 7, suffered internal bleeding to the torso, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin confirmed to Fox News on Wednesday." https://www.fox5ny.com/news/jonathan-ross-injuries-renee-good-jan-14-2026
Even bruising is internal bleeding. That's probably true, just sensationalized. The pattern to avoid is to believe every single thing anyone says against the "right" position, regardless of evidence, and disregard anything the "right" says as fabricated despite no evidence of that. This results in perpetual self-confirmation.
|
On January 15 2026 13:25 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2026 12:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:It looks like they've resorted to fabricating injuries to justify attacks made by ICE. This is about as believable as Trump's doctors reporting that he's the pinnacle of presidential health. "Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who fatally shot Renee Nicole Good on Jan. 7, suffered internal bleeding to the torso, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin confirmed to Fox News on Wednesday." https://www.fox5ny.com/news/jonathan-ross-injuries-renee-good-jan-14-2026 Even bruising is internal bleeding. That's probably true, just sensationalized. The pattern to avoid is to believe every single thing anyone says against the "right" position, regardless of evidence, and disregard anything the "right" says as fabricated despite no evidence of that. This results in perpetual self-confirmation.
If it's referring to a superficial bruise, then I'd buy that. I hadn't considered the equivalent of banging my knee on a piece of furniture, but you're right that a bruise is categorized as internal bleeding (and that this report is at least being sensationalist). Fair point.
Being skeptical of claims that lack evidence is a fine default position though, and not necessarily a pro-right vs. anti-right philosophy. I'd still like to see what the injury is.
|
On January 15 2026 06:46 Manit0u wrote:
Also demanding that NATO do something about Denmark.
Great idea. NATO should fulfil the mutual obligations to them if Denmark ask.
|
Trump claims the US needs to control Greenland so Russia and China can't right? But I'm wondering about the logistics of either of those countries "controlling" Greenland.
Let's start with China. China is quite far away and not an Arctic country at all. For China to take a stab at conquering Greenland, they'd (presumably) have to sail a fleet through the Bering strait. How exactly would they do that without the US or Russia stopping them? And let's say they somehow do manage and they conquer Greenland. There's not much of anything there, so how is China resupplying the considerable army they'd have to have there to stop a NATO expedition from taking it back?
On to Russia. Russia is near Greenland, yes, but not in any easy or meaningful way. They can't even take Ukraine, a close neighbor who they prepared years to attack and overthrow in 3 days. What makes anybody think they can mount a successful attack across the Arctic sea? I could imagine Russia could maybe establish a small forward base on the north coast of Greenland. But then what? There's a reason the north of Greenland is mostly unpopulated. It's the same one Ellismere Island, Svalbard, the north coast of Alaska and, of course, the entire north coast of Russia, is mostly unpopulated: it is extremely remote and, despite global warming, extremely inhospitable. A small expeditionary force would not be enough to stick around if NATO doesn't want them there. So... then what? How does Russia get an army capable of taking and holding Greenland against NATO opposition?
So how are these "threats to Greenland" realistic? He might as well invoke Cuba or Iran as enemies that might "just take Greenland". Now I don't doubt that both Russia and China, if offered total control over Greenland, wouldn't jump at the chance. In the case of China it'd give them potential to control part of the Arctic and its shipping lanes. In the case of Russia it'd give them essentially complete hegemony over the Arctic. But it being of strategic value to them doesn't mean they can actually do anything about it.
|
The russian threat to Greenland that was not seen through the high of cold war is seen now, when Trump has alegdly excelent relations with russian president. And it's Denmark the problem...
Well, how about ensuring Greenland not became russian or chinese by simply STICK TO YOUR MUTUAL DEFENCE OBLIGATIONS.
Yeah, I know it's hard. So new and never seen before concept is difficult to implement. It requires only obeying your concience.
|
Your trying way to hard Acro, the US already defends Greenland via Nato and if they wanted a bigger presence they could have just asked if they could put another base and likely would have gotten a yes
This has nothing to do with security.
|
On January 15 2026 17:59 Gorsameth wrote:
Your trying way to hard Acro, the US already defends Greenland via Nato and if they wanted a bigger presence they could have just asked if they could put another base and likely would have gotten a yes
This has nothing to do with security.
By agreement they have unrestricted military access to Greenland already. In the past several years they have reduced their presence on Greenland from >10k soldiers to 150 soldiers so by 99% themselves.
Before Trump started threatening his own allies and insinuating USA leaving NATO if they wanted more military presence on Greenlad, missile launchers, radars or whatever all they had to do is ask and they would get it. Now they're trying to get it at gunpoint instead. *insert "Diplomacy: 100" meme here*
Here's an interesting read about the US presence in Greenland in history: https://theconversation.com/us-military-has-a-long-history-in-greenland-from-mining-during-wwii-to-a-nuclear-powered-army-base-built-into-the-ice-273355
|
On January 15 2026 17:59 Gorsameth wrote:
Your trying way to hard Acro, the US already defends Greenland via Nato and if they wanted a bigger presence they could have just asked if they could put another base and likely would have gotten a yes
This has nothing to do with security.
Guy that slaps his name on every building he can and is obsessed with awards was told there is a large landmass with barely any people he could get so he can cement his name as the president that significantly expanded the US on the map. That's all there is to it. We need to stop engaging with the post-hoc bullshit they come up with as reasons, it gives the impression that there's a legitimate debate about security to be had where there is none. It's no different than if he said Greenland must be taken because it has a problem with witchcraft. Even if you make them abandon a reason, they'll just move on to the next pretext same as Russia did 100 times to explain Ukraine.
|
I want to add that Trump's territorial claims (I don't say "american" claims, as I don't see universal support from Americans. Not in internet, at least) put his proclaimed "Europe must defend themselves" in geopardy, because that cretin forces Europe's hand to send soldiers out of continent, those could in different situation be a provisional reinforcements to the Eastern Europe if this shithead in Kremlin had any funny ideas again.
|
China with a record trade surplus. Who could have predicted that Trump would fail this hard again? I mean I thought his policy of attacking his allies and constantly moving the goal posts on trade negotiations would make America great again. But instead it is making China great.
Given how Russia is fairing, the US and China, is it time to consider that maybe Trump has actually been an agent of China all along?
Or you know, just a silver spooned spoiled brat who grew up ultra rich so he has no sense and has never been told no, no matter how dumb the shit he says and does is. Putting these nepo babies in positions of power is so bad.
|
Trump is an agent for himself, he thinks he should be a king and admires people who rule with an iron fist, he likes Putin and Xi, he likes Orban, Nethyanahu, Bukele, MBS etc. and all of them, each in their own way helped to get him re-elected.
They knew that he'd do the "multi polar world" shit, they knew that the people he hates the most (and the people that his tech bro oligarch despise) are the EU democracies who insist on rule of law, regulations, sustainability, so it was absolutely in their interest to put their thumbs on the scale, the most obvious example being Israel ignoring attempts by the Biden administration to reach a ceasefire in Gaza in order to make sure Biden doesn't get a win there before the elections. As soon as Trump came in, before he was even sworn in they announced the plan and touted him as the man behind it.
Putin's Russia was also involved, they knew that he's going to be be good for them, he stopped weapon deliveries, I mean, on the eve of Invasion he said Putin is a genius for doing it, he helped them collapse the Kursk incursion by stopping the intelligence sharing temporarily, and there is a lot of credible evidence that many of the bomb threats called in at the polling stations in swing states originated from Russia.
There is a very open world wide "conspiracy" of nationalists and authoritarians to divvy up the world in 3 spheres of influence, and the main enemy for them is Europe because Europe doesn't share their values.
|
Indeed. They despise us. Actually, I don't think China despises us or even cares for all that matter. I'm almost certain we could find a lot of common ground with them and they might soften up if we tried our best.
In any case, the relations with the US have soured and I think they can become more isolated more quickly than many people assume. Mexico and Canada don't need to trade with then necessarily, it's just convenient at this point in time. If the hassle is too big because uncertainty they'll just pivot. (Ultra)nationalists need to be quarantined, they're too destructive to risk otherwise.
|
An interesting topic is why US relations with Iran is bad under Trump? Lower Iran Oil exports to get more US profit? Very heavily favoring Israel over logic? Islamist nation?
Seen from a republican lens Iran is what they are striving for. Theocratic dictatorship that stamps on their own citizens. Just replace the religion and they have their model.
|
On January 16 2026 03:40 Yurie wrote:
An interesting topic is why US relations with Iran is bad under Trump? Lower Iran Oil exports to get more US profit? Very heavily favoring Israel over logic? Islamist nation?
Seen from a republican lens Iran is what they are striving for. Theocratic dictatorship that stamps on their own citizens. Just replace the religion and they have their model. Israel
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
