|
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 August 01 2026 22:45 LightSpectra wrote: That was truly one of the most insane posts I've had the pleasure to read, from "there are billionaires on Medicaid" to "long COVID isn't real". There's a little bit of everything in there. There aren't billionaires on Medicaid.
|
On August 01 2026 23:46 Geiko wrote: So anyway, in a shocking turn of events, it turns out that the damage to the reflecting pool was not due to vandals but due to "a flawed installation by the contractor and a rush to finish the project in time" according to the DOJ. Not gonna lie I was really hoping from some pictures of those ninjas with boxcutters. What extremely shocking information. I bet oBlades confidence in the administration is totally shaken since he was just bamboozeled for the 624th time this term.
|
"FOX News host indicts blatantly innocent man to cover up President's incompetent nepotism no-bid contract" would be such an insane headline in ordinary times, but it's like the twentieth most grossly corrupt thing that's happened this month
|
I don't know if oblade is aware of this but enforceing means testing and work testing costs money. There is no study that says that the money spent on paperwork, investigation, and enforcement is less than the ammount saved. All it does is lower the dignity of the people who need to apply and make it harder for them to get the services they need.
Its literally conservatives wanting a bigger government and more bloated budgets, the only answer that works is that its about cruelty and hatred of the poor.
|
Isn't this just assuming that you're right, and forcing the other person to prove a negative? I'm very familiar with absence of evidence claims: There is an absence of evidence against my claims, and thus that's evidence for my claims. Then a little ad hominem with the cruelty and hatred of the poor, because there is no downside to poisoning the well. The proper response is to assume Sermokala is wrong, and demand he produce a study that fraud investigation and enforcement costs are higher than recovered fraud funds and prevention of future fraud. Maybe a point on "there's no study that shows fraud investigation and enforcement costs are higher than recovery and prevention" will drive the problem home.
|
On August 02 2026 13:20 Sermokala wrote: I don't know if oblade is aware of this but enforceing means testing and work testing costs money. Everything costs money. Having welfare costs more money than not having it. This is not an argument you believe in. Having a DMV and administering driving tests costs more money than just giving everyone a free driver's license and waiting to see if they crash. I like to be optimistic and assume you're not so far gone as to think that would be a good idea.
On August 02 2026 13:20 Sermokala wrote: There is no study that says that the money spent on paperwork, investigation, and enforcement is less than the ammount saved. All it does is lower the dignity of the people who need to apply and make it harder for them to get the services they need. How do you propose to measure how much food stamps, housing, financial aid, and disability people should get without doing needs testing?
Just let everyone take whatever they want from the federal tip jar until it's dry, because checking whether they need it or not is mean?
On August 02 2026 13:20 Sermokala wrote: Its literally conservatives wanting a bigger government and more bloated budgets, the only answer that works is that its about cruelty and hatred of the poor. Tell me the upper limit of how much money you would send someone with no evidence that they needed it.
|
On August 02 2026 15:34 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2026 13:20 Sermokala wrote: I don't know if oblade is aware of this but enforceing means testing and work testing costs money. Everything costs money. Having welfare costs more money than not having it. This is not an argument you believe in. Having a DMV and administering driving tests costs more money than just giving everyone a free driver's license and waiting to see if they crash. I like to be optimistic and assume you're not so far gone as to think that would be a good idea. Show nested quote +On August 02 2026 13:20 Sermokala wrote: There is no study that says that the money spent on paperwork, investigation, and enforcement is less than the ammount saved. All it does is lower the dignity of the people who need to apply and make it harder for them to get the services they need. How do you propose to measure how much food stamps, housing, financial aid, and disability people should get without doing needs testing? Just let everyone take whatever they want from the federal tip jar until it's dry, because checking whether they need it or not is mean? Show nested quote +On August 02 2026 13:20 Sermokala wrote: Its literally conservatives wanting a bigger government and more bloated budgets, the only answer that works is that its about cruelty and hatred of the poor. Tell me the upper limit of how much money you would send someone with no evidence that they needed it.
Who won the 2020 election?
|
United States44207 Posts
I think the odds of a negotiated settlement with Iran are low at this point. There’s an unsolvable trust issue, Iran can compel the US to make promises regarding the strait or reparations but it can’t compel the US to keep them. We saw this with the $300b fund that changed from cash for reconstruction to a voucher for US farm products. Trump’s negotiating team are happy to make concessions, and happier still if the timeline is vague and the specifics are missing, but they can’t control Trump. They can’t make any commitment that’ll bind him to future action. Nobody can, not even Trump who is actively waging war against his own signature trade agreement with Canada.
This is the permanent damage being done that Trump and his supporters refuse to acknowledge. Every human interaction short of murder etc. requires a degree of cooperation. Even forcing someone to do something at gun point, they still need to believe you’re not going to kill them immediately afterwards. With things like the JCPOA you could maybe argue that there’s limited reliability between changing administrations. It’s a terrible argument, a gentleman’s agreement to honour previous agreements helps you too because you want your agreements honoured by the next guy (as Biden did with Trump’s surrender to the Taliban) but whatever. But Trump not only shits all over his own prior agreements, he demonstrates no understanding that they were even his. It’s truly Orwellian, he seems to really believe that they were agreed to by some other idiot. His relationship with the truth is that of a schizophrenic, we see him angrily tweeting at the justice department for their inability to find evidence for what he knows to be true. The truth is whatever he decides it to be on a given day and the world is required to reshape itself around that.
Let’s say Iran really did want to surrender. Let’s say they wanted to offer concessions, they’d recognize Israel and stop funding proxies and he’d remove sanctions. A pretty clear US victory in that hypothetical. They can’t actually do that. They can’t get an agreement on those terms to stick. There’s nobody they can negotiate with that can control Trump and get him to honour the sanctions removal, not even Trump himself.
Without an agreement this can only be resolved through time and the exchange of missiles. A game of what is more combustible, an oil refinery or a mountain. A game of who sinks first between a floating metal box filled with oil and a Toyota hilux parked in a copse of trees. One side will eventually just stop and cede the maximalist demands of the other. Maximalist demands because that’s what happens if you just stop fighting, maximalist demands because you can’t compromise if you can’t be trusted.
When that happens there’s not really any cap on the geopolitical loss for the US. The withdrawal from strategic bases in the Gulf, the loss of free navigation of waterways, the loss of the petrodollar, the loss of US led global security frameworks, and so forth.
A ground invasion would actually be the less bad thing at this point, despite the ruinous cost and American dead. But it’s politically impossible and has lost a lot of its leverage value.
Some months ago I argued that there was a good way of doing this. Start building up ground forces in the region, stockpiling interceptors, filling the SPR, working on coalition building, increasing the supply of oil elsewhere, telling China/Japan to prepare for disruption etc. In that world where you’re clearly telegraphing an upcoming regime change invasion you have a lot of leverage over Iran. You can anchor negotiations at “we’re coming in and we’re going to hang you all” and work backwards from there. And while talks are ongoing they can’t close the strait until you actually cross the border. Reports on the February negotiations from the Qatari mediators are pretty clear that Iran was, at that time, willing to make a lot of significant concessions including the surrender of enriched uranium. Maximalist US demands at that point in the context of US army groups deployed on the border would have had a lot more weight and if negotiations broke down then occupation could have begun. With a credible threat and credible negotiators an occupation could still have been averted. + Show Spoiler +On April 09 2026 01:13 KwarK wrote: The fundamental issue here is one of Trump’s leadership. He has completely failed to make the case for war, both internationally and at home. The entirely worthwhile goal of the end of IRGC rule in Iran was only going to be achieved by a land invasion, something which the US is absolutely capable of doing. The superiority of US forces is not a question here, we saw that in the air war and the rescue operation. If the US puts a million men in Iraq then the writing is on the wall.
And at that point the IRGC feels real pressure. They know they’re going to end up hanged in the town square for the January massacres. There’s no strategy that can save them there, in a pure test of arms they lose, and they lose absolutely. In that scenario they can’t leverage the strait or missiles or play for time, they’re deeply unpopular and without a local monopoly of force they cease to exist. They can impose costs on the world but America has already gone all in, imposing costs and saying you’ll remove them under certain conditions is a negotiating position that doesn’t work against an all in adversary.
But that’s not what happened. Not only has a substantial US force not crossed into Iran, mobilization of one hasn’t started. The IRGC know that there’s no military threat, that they just need to focus on internal security and play for time with imposing costs on the world. The US has outlined their win condition for them, survive and wait.
And at this point, after all that has happened, after all the threats and declarations of victory, I think it is too late for Trump to pivot to a real plan. It’s too late to mobilize and commit to a full ground war. Too many countries have been alienated, too much economic pain has been inflicted, the message is lost.
And that’s why this is solely a crisis of US leadership. In January after the massacres the case was right there, waiting to be made. You fill the strategic oil reserves, both domestically and abroad in China/Japan etc. You keep the public message laser focused on those massacres, you know the strait will be closed, you don’t care, your mission is just, you’re prepared to pay the cost. The closure isn’t something Iran is doing in response to Israeli strikes, Israel isn’t even involved, this is something the IRGC is doing in an attempt to escape accountability for their crimes against the people of Iran. You flood the region with interceptors, you redeploy naval assets, both yours and those of your coalition partners (because you built a coalition this time). And then, after months of prep, you start moving troops to Iraq.
Nothing to do with nuclear enrichment (dealt with in 2025) or Hezbollah (being an Israeli proxy wins you no friends). The message is clear and has been repeated daily for months, you’re not at war with the people of Iran, you’re prosecuting the IRGC for crimes against humanity. And you will succeed, it’s not in doubt, the US military is deployed for full occupation. There’s only 20 million barrels coming out the gulf daily, the world could easily stomach 6 months of interdiction with filled up storage. The US leads that, releasing oil and gas from storage at previous prices, but Japan etc. have substantial storage capability as well. IRGC loyalists know that it’s over and flee to Russia because it’s not like they’re going to defeat the US Army.
But none of that happened. Trump spent the months after the January massacres threatening to invade NATO and then announced war with Iran at random one evening. Since then he has insulted every US ally, declared this to be a religious campaign of genocide that nobody can get behind, spiked costs for people all around the world, and has yet to make any kind of credible threat against the IRGC regime itself. The US people don’t even know why they’re at war, they don’t believe in it, and given this is a war against an objectively evil regime that’s an absurd failure. This is the worst of all timelines, Trump is the one US President who could start a war with Iran with the full resources of the US military, economy, and alliance system behind him and then lose the fucking thing.
But the threats have no leverage anymore and the offers have no confidence. There’s no way out. This’ll continue until Trump loses his hold on power and then it’ll just stop in line with Iran’s maximalist demands because what else is there.
|
It's like they brainstormed the most retarded way to fight a war and decided to go with that plan.
|
What happens if Trump and co. decide to just blow up Iran's energy and water infrastructure and create the worst humanitarian disaster in history because they can't assassinate Khameini?
|
United States24785 Posts
On August 02 2026 23:32 LightSpectra wrote: What happens if Trump and co. decide to just blow up Iran's energy and water infrastructure and create the worst humanitarian disaster in history because they can't assassinate Khameini? Trump's approval rating goes down by 0.01 points.
|
United States44207 Posts
On August 02 2026 23:32 LightSpectra wrote: What happens if Trump and co. decide to just blow up Iran's energy and water infrastructure and create the worst humanitarian disaster in history because they can't assassinate Khameini? A full MAD scenario? A hundred million deaths across the Gulf? The Gulf states seem to believe Iran’s threats to their infrastructure are highly credible so I see no reason to disbelieve them.
|
Friday on markets closing:
"I am not gonna attack, we have some sort of deal, Straight is open"
Iran: "The fuck it is."
Sunday before markets open
"We think about massive warcrimes (attacking civilian infrastructure that is vital to survival of the population)"
|
It doesn’t matter what Trump says, he has no credibility. We, like those in the negotiations, have absolutely no idea what is going to happen until it does. Massive amounts of stupidity matched with massive arrogance and loads of power is extremely difficult to predict.
|
Effect wears down, but markets did react before the weekly TACO-Tuesday.
AI-Corps are copying the Trump style though.
"Trump says...." gets reactions like he actually can DO those things he says.
While the things he DOES don't get the same coverage.
(Hiding the Epstein files, accepting bribes via crypto..)
"Oh nooo our AI went rogue on itself and attacked .. somebody!" Oh no bad POTENT puppy.. it's so POTENT.. buy the AI!
(Spends 5000 Trillion dollars on RAM.. isn't making anything.. yet...)
|
On August 02 2026 23:32 LightSpectra wrote: What happens if Trump and co. decide to just blow up Iran's energy and water infrastructure and create the worst humanitarian disaster in history because they can't assassinate Khameini? Iran retaliates like they have repeatedly said they would by striking oil, energy and water infrastructure of everyone around them, drone and missile intercepts fail because we know the US is basically out of patriot missiles. Then the entire middle east turns into a real life rendition of a post apocalyptic earth. Couple of million people die, hundreds of million refugees overwhelm the countries outside Iran's strike range and we all curse the US for another 2 generations.
|
On August 03 2026 01:08 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2026 23:32 LightSpectra wrote: What happens if Trump and co. decide to just blow up Iran's energy and water infrastructure and create the worst humanitarian disaster in history because they can't assassinate Khameini? + Show Spoiler +Iran retaliates like they have repeatedly said they would by striking oil, energy and water infrastructure of everyone around them, drone and missile intercepts fail because we know the US is basically out of patriot missiles. Then the entire middle east turns into a real life rendition of a post apocalyptic earth. Couple of million people die, hundreds of million refugees overwhelm the countries outside Iran's strike range and we all curse the US for another 2 generations. I believe you mean "suck the US's farts like its butthole is a scuba regulator"
|
|
|
|
|
|