EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 993
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9005 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11620 Posts
On December 20 2018 01:00 Plansix wrote: That makes sense from the point of view of efficiency, but I don’t think it will do much to earn back public trust in law enforcement. The end result with be that white collar criminals that steal millions from large banks and the super wealthy will be punished and on average some people will be protected. The person I cited above was taking advantage of average renters and was allowed to do so for years. If he is considered to be “to small to be worth it” the average person also feels like the criminals that take advantage of them are permitted to do so because the government only cares about millionaires and big banks. If people want to restore public trust it will take more that quick solutions and going after the low hanging fruit. We need to look at why public trust has eroded and what caused that. True. The main thing here is that there should be a reason for laws to be the way they are. And if there is a reason for laws to be the way they are, you should enforce those laws. Currently, it appears that in the US, some laws are selectively or never enforced. That is very, very bad because a selectively enforced law allows arbitrariness on behalf of the people enforcing the law. They can go after the people they dislike, and ignore the crimes of the people they like. That is not a good basis for a legal system. If you have laws that you cannot enforce, either remove the laws or hire more people until you can enforce those laws on everyone. If you can not afford to enforce a law on everyone, you can not afford to have that law at all. Decide which laws are worth enforcing, and hire enough people to enforce those. Fines should always be seen as a punishment and not as a source of revenue, or you have an utterly perverted incentive system for law enforcement. ----------- Legal system rant: And if you are seriously wondering why people lose faith in the US legal system, to me it is quite obvious that that is based on the fact that winning in court seems to be mostly correlated to the money that you invest in comparison to the other party, and not to the actual legal situation at hand. And if you dispute this, you should really question why there are so many expensive lawyers around. That only makes sense if people believe that they have a better chance of winning when they get a better lawyer. I think that that is very bad. People should have a better chance of winning in a court of law if they are in the right, not if they have the more expensive lawyer. Just imagine fighting Disney in a copyright court. I don't even have to describe the situation to you, because you already know that Disney is going to almost certainly win by throwing lawyer money at the problem. The result is completely unrelated to the actual situation. You just don't fight Disney (or any other big corporation) in court, because it is going to ruin you. If Disney lawyers write to you to stop doing X, or start doing Y, you do that or you are fucked. This is an utterly perverted legal system. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
A good example for TL is video game streaming. There is an ongoing theory that all the “Lets Play” videos on youtube are considered Fair Use. Although there is a pretty good legal argument to support that, it is only an argument. There is no case law. And because no one has been willing to go to the mat to see if it is fair use or not, the industry around streaming video games has grown larger and larger. And that is seen a good for streamers. But it also means that they are dependent on platforms like Twitch to work out deals with companies to stream their games. And when a company says no, it comes a huge shock to so many people. But the reality is that the companies can always say no because streamers and streaming companies like Twitch have not pushed the matter through the courts. So now we are at the point where platforms like Twitch are this kinda fucked up form of feudalism where we can all use their service, but also they can deny us rights based on the whim of any company with more money than us. And this is just how things operate now, because no one has really challenged that status quo. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
Somebody got to Trump and explained how leaving Syria now would help him politically with his base (probably the Turks who just today agreed to buy a bunch of Patriot missiles - what a coincidence!). | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21945 Posts
So, was this Trump being bored and looking for a distraction or did Putin poke someone to get Trump to withdraw? | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On December 20 2018 07:50 Plansix wrote: Domestically the decision is great, people don't want to be involved with that conflict. Long term is unknown. But I'm sure Israel will be thrilled to Iranian troops and weapon emplacements about 500 kilometers away. Dont get me wrong, I'm not against leaving in general. However the timing is completely random and has no basis on what is happening on the ground. I have absolutely zero doubt that the decision to leave is entirely political and has nothing to do with what is the smart strategic or tactical choice. Since he has the attention span of an autistic child, somebody got into his ear very recently and told him some sweet words about how he would benefit personally from leaving now. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On December 20 2018 07:07 Plansix wrote: Trump failed to consult or inform the Pentagon that he planned on withdrawing from Syria. The democrats are not even in the House yet and the man is cracking under the pressure. https://twitter.com/christinawilkie/status/1075476272267096065 After the border deployment stunt and now this, some career professionals there must be thrilled to be led by such a exemplary commander in chief. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4355 Posts
Withdraws troops from Syria. He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure... | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On December 20 2018 09:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Helps broker peace between North and South Korea. Withdraws troops from Syria. He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure... Well neither deserve it. The 'peace' between NK and SK isn't a real thing, a stat maybe, but not real yet. Withdrawing US troops from Syria just means that Assad wins, not that there is peace anytime soon. Normally I would say people are trolling but with you I just don't know | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 20 2018 09:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Helps broker peace between North and South Korea. Withdraws troops from Syria. He deserves the nobel peace prize more than Obama thats for sure... Takes photo op with NK, who is still developing weapons. Withdraws from Syria, maybe? Gives regional control over to Russia and Iran, maybe sparks further conflict with Israel. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On December 20 2018 10:04 Plansix wrote: Takes photo op with NK, who is still developing weapons. Withdraws from Syria, maybe? Gives regional control over to Russia and Iran, maybe sparks further conflict with Israel. Sparking conflict with Israel is a good thing, so long as we don't defend Israel. The region needs to be allowed to reach equilibrium. Or at least the Middle East version of equilibrium where there are only 3 or 4 conflicting groups. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21945 Posts
Unlike the EU, Israel has no compulsion about retaliating in force. On December 20 2018 10:06 Mohdoo wrote: Cause that worked out really well last time someone tried...Sparking conflict with Israel is a good thing, so long as we don't defend Israel. The region needs to be allowed to reach equilibrium. Or at least the Middle East version of equilibrium where there are only 3 or 4 conflicting groups. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4355 Posts
On December 20 2018 10:04 Plansix wrote: Takes photo op with NK, who is still developing weapons. Withdraws from Syria, maybe? Gives regional control over to Russia and Iran, maybe sparks further conflict with Israel. Alternative is to keep troops in Syria costing the US x Billion over x years (US still in Afghanistan 17 years later).So in the context of US interests he did the best thing for the US. My opinion has always been the US, Israel and Saudi represent a greater threat to world peace than Iran and Russia.China is a concern though with it’s Island building etc. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 20 2018 10:06 Mohdoo wrote: Sparking conflict with Israel is a good thing, so long as we don't defend Israel. The region needs to be allowed to reach equilibrium. Or at least the Middle East version of equilibrium where there are only 3 or 4 conflicting groups. This isn’t a video game. Also Israel would just win, just like last time. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 20 2018 10:14 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Alternative is to keep troops in Syria costing the US x Billion over x years (US still in Afghanistan 17 years later).So in the context of US interests he did the best thing for the US. My opinion has always been the US, Israel and Saudi represent a greater threat to world peace than Iran and Russia.China is a concern though with it’s Island building etc. We can afford the 2000 troops in Turkey. And it’s weird you would cite Saudi Arabia over Iran, rather than understanding that those two nations have been conflict for decades and are both dangerous. But then again, you have always has a pretty tenuous grasp of the facts. | ||
| ||
