US Politics: All about the Motherland

A forum for the respectful exchange of views on thought-provoking topics, whether sexuality-related or otherwise; please read the guidelines prior to posting.

Forum rules

Welcome to the Intellectual Discussion subforum.

This forum is the place for intellectual discussions, such as philosophical or scientific debates. There are some guidelines that apply specifically to posts in this forum, of which you will be expected to have made yourself aware before participating. They are as follows:

  • Intellectually stimulating topics only. If you can't have a deep discussion about something, it does not belong here.
  • If you're going to post, have something to say. When you make a new thread, write the initial post in a way that provides an introduction to the topic and invites further discussion. You could tell us how you feel and why, but always aim for constructive responses that further a discussion about the ideas involved, rather than a simple list of people's views. (Instead of asking "Are you a vegetarian?", discuss some of the arguments involved.) This guideline likewise applies for responses to topics.
  • Write using good English. That means full sentences with proper capitalisation, punctuation, spelling and grammar. No one is perfect, though; this is not an invitation to criticise others for minor mistakes.
  • Be nice. This is a forum for rational discourse, not flame wars. No one is always right. Be respectful of other people's views and accept that we are all entitled to our own.

These guidelines will be enforced by the moderators based on their best judgement, and anyone who does not take them seriously will lose the privilege of posting here. Spammers will be banned from the entire forum.

GTF's Presidential Approval: At this moment, do you approve of Donald Trump's job as President?

Yes
13
18%
No
58
82%
 
Total votes : 71

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Lightbringer » 17th March, 2017, 7:10 pm

ConnorM wrote:
Lightbringer wrote:Pity, current Visa/Green Card holders are allowed in BECAUSE of the judges. Trump's order blocked them as well. Look up your facts.

Banning Iran was publicity stunt to gain favor with Israel. I have a bridge to sell you if you think otherwise. There is not a single terrorist in history with Iranian origins. Therefore we say "Iran is funding terrorists".

You're talking about a country that was using child soldiers to clear minefields thirty years ago. Yeah, I'm not buying "There is not a single terrorist in history with Iranian origins".


That's an awfully twisted version of events. The age of consent is 15 in Iran, and that's not just about sex. During Iran's war with Iraq, 15 to 18 year old teenagers volunteered to fight for their country and legally they had the right. Using the buzz word "child soldiers" does nothing here. NO ONE was forced to serve. So whether it was clearing mind fields or simply fighting in a war, you are looking at the issue with an American viewpoint and refusing to see outside the box.

In fact, there was a 16 year old teenager who is commonly known as Shahid Fahmideh (Shahid means martyr) who was the only thing between an Iraqi tank destroying his village, so he grabbed a grenade belt and tucked it on and dashed under the tank. The tank was destroyed and his village was saved. The day of his death is official "teenager day" in Iran to honor him.

And the part about no terrorist ever having Iranian nationality is true.
User avatar
Lightbringer
Member
 
First name: Lucas
Posts: 361
Likes received: 19
Joined: 16th September, 2016, 5:02 pm
Location: Italian vagabond on pilgrimage
Country: Germany (de)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby bluesunstorm » 17th March, 2017, 8:55 pm

GaycrazyBoi wrote:
bluesunstorm wrote:
Pity wrote:Judge Derrick Watson stated: "The illogic of the Government's contentions is palpable. The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. Equally flawed is the notion that the Executive Order cannot be found to have targeted Islam because it applies to all individuals in the six referenced countries. It is undisputed, using the primary source upon which the government itself relies, that these six countries have overwhelmingly Muslim populations that range from 90.7% to 99.8%. It would therefore be no paradigmatic leap to conclude that targeting these countries likewise targets Islam. Certainly, it would be inappropriate to conclude, as the Government does, that it does not.

As you can see, nothing in his statement criticizes the constitutionality of the executive order. Instead, it is all based on political activism.

Broken down:

1. Creating a temporary halt on a select few nations does not create animus as the halt is not indefinite. In addition, current visa holders are allowed in.

2. It does not target Islam itself. If it did, Islam itself would be restricted and most, if not all, Muslim countries would be banned.

3. If it was a Muslim ban, countries like Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, and Comoros would also be banned too.

4. The EO is a strategic one and prevents terrorism from seeping in the US, which is 100% legal by our current laws. Iran funds terrorism. There is no real functioning government in Libya as it is torn by chaos and radicalism. Sudan is plagued with terrorist camps and rebel groups in the Darfur region. Yemen is currently in a civil war. Somalia is still embroiled with radicalism and terrorist organizations despite their government.

The judge stated that one doesn't have to target an entire demographic/group at once to discriminate against them. Rudy Giuliani admitted that Trump came to him and asked him to legally find a way to create a travel ban that targets Muslims. It's difficult to say it's not Trump's intention to ban Muslims with everything he's said. He lied about witnessing Muslims cheer on 9/11 in New Jersey, and during his presidential campaign, he said that Muslims should be banned until Congress or whoever can figure out "what the hell is going on".


So, the exact same thing Obama did is now bad. Except now they made comments you don't like, the ban is now racist/sexist/Islamophobic etc. and should not be allowed because you don't like what he said. This isn't how a country should work

I know how much Trump and his supporters/right-wingers love to use President Obama and Hillary Clinton for diversion and deflection - the claim that President Obama did the same thing as Trump is trying to do is completely untrue. President Obama's order was in response to a specific threat (the "Bowling Green Massacre", as Kelly Con likes to call it). President Obama's order put a six-month halt on refugee processing from Iraq only, but Iraqi refugees were still admitted into the US during that time. President Obama's visa waiver law also only dealt with people from a list of 38 countries who had visited Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen after March 2011, but didn't ban citizens of those seven specific countries themselves. Trump's order isn't in response to any threat incident, and it bans travel to the US by citizens of those seven countries.
I loves Kylie Minogue, rainbows, sprinkles, teddy bears, Lisa Frank, Hello Kitty, pop & dance music, and Lindsay Lohan movies.
User avatar
bluesunstorm
Member
 
First name: Casey
Posts: 687
Likes received: 4
Joined: 15th February, 2013, 4:32 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Togetik » 17th March, 2017, 9:05 pm

Trump has apparently decided that the english are spying on him now for some reason, putting the whole "Obama wiretapped my phone" lie out to pasture.

I don't really get why he thinks everyone is spying on him, or why we're pretending that he's not just lying about it again
User avatar
Togetik
Member
 
Posts: 492
Likes received: 60
Joined: 5th February, 2016, 11:24 pm
Country: Australia (au)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Knope » 17th March, 2017, 10:38 pm

One thing that HAS to be put to bed as soon as possible is the notion that these outrageous tweets and allegations from Trump are intentional distractions.

This is not the case. He actually, genuinely believes these things.

We're talking about a guy who went on a hunt for Obama's birth certificate, and who's very publicly indulged in various far/alt-right conspiracy theories for years, if not decades.

Conservatives often try and spin it so that Hillary for example is somehow both an absolute moron AND an evil mastermind who's plotting the takeover of America. Well, you can't have it both ways. Sorry. Those ideas directly contradict one another. Is she an incompetent idiot, or an evil fascist, communist, aspiring dictator? Pick one, but she can't be both.

This also applies to Trump. Don't call him a moron and an ignoramus one second, and then when he does something stupid because he has absolutely no impulse control abandon that and accuse him of manufacturing ideas in a diabolical scheme to divert the media and American public from other problems.

Also worth noting that it's somewhat irrelevant whether or not these insane tweets and public statements are meant to act as distractions, as there's a great deal that can go on behind the scenes and in Washington that, while remaining unclassified, unprivileged knowledge, can go unnoticed by even the most politically dedicated and voracious people. Trying to keep up with absolutely everything that goes on can be hopeless and futile. We need to push for greater transparency and openness in governmental affairs, but more importantly we need to all try to raise the bar regarding what's considered newsworthy and generally worth knowing.
ImageImageImage
User avatar
Knope
Westeros' Vice Captain
Popularité Third Place
 
Posts: 1262
Likes received: 71
Joined: 13th December, 2015, 8:34 pm
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby TheBrunswickian » 18th March, 2017, 12:23 am

Knope wrote:One thing that HAS to be put to bed as soon as possible is the notion that these outrageous tweets and allegations from Trump are intentional distractions.

This is not the case. He actually, genuinely believes these things.

We're talking about a guy who went on a hunt for Obama's birth certificate, and who's very publicly indulged in various far/alt-right conspiracy theories for years, if not decades.

Conservatives often try and spin it so that Hillary for example is somehow both an absolute moron AND an evil mastermind who's plotting the takeover of America. Well, you can't have it both ways. Sorry. Those ideas directly contradict one another. Is she an incompetent idiot, or an evil fascist, communist, aspiring dictator? Pick one, but she can't be both.

This also applies to Trump. Don't call him a moron and an ignoramus one second, and then when he does something stupid because he has absolutely no impulse control abandon that and accuse him of manufacturing ideas in a diabolical scheme to divert the media and American public from other problems.

Also worth noting that it's somewhat irrelevant whether or not these insane tweets and public statements are meant to act as distractions, as there's a great deal that can go on behind the scenes and in Washington that, while remaining unclassified, unprivileged knowledge, can go unnoticed by even the most politically dedicated and voracious people. Trying to keep up with absolutely everything that goes on can be hopeless and futile. We need to push for greater transparency and openness in governmental affairs, but more importantly we need to all try to raise the bar regarding what's considered newsworthy and generally worth knowing.

Agreed. Personally I think Trump is just a bumbling idiot surrounded by the evil, manipulative masterminds of the operation. People like Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner, even Mike Pence. They're the real brains of the operation here. The main point I have about Bannon's role is his promotion to a permanent member of the National Security Council, while the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Director of National Intelligence are no longer considered important enough to be at every meeting of the NSC. That's insane!

It should be apparent that Trump doesn't want this job. He's in Florida every weekend playing golf. He's still holding rallies. He's up all hours of the night tweeting bizarre conspiracy theories about Obama wiretapping Trump Tower. Or was it MI6? And does Kellyanne Conway still have her microwave? Meanwhile while this happens, Ryan is trying desperately to save his healthcare bill after the CBO said 24 million people will lost health insurance.
House Cup 2016 - Team Westeros


Image
User avatar
TheBrunswickian
Jesslut, Community Ambassador
 
First name: Jesse
Posts: 2509
Likes received: 260
Joined: 30th January, 2014, 11:49 pm
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia (au)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Togetik » 18th March, 2017, 1:00 am

Knope wrote:We need to push for greater transparency and openness in governmental affairs, but more importantly we need to all try to raise the bar regarding what's considered newsworthy and generally worth knowing.


Agree with you, but i'd like to know what you mean by the newsworthy/worth knowing part.

In the context of Trump I don't think there's been anything that i'd consider not newsworthy just on the basis that not reporting on his nonsense normalises it in ways it shouldn't be
User avatar
Togetik
Member
 
Posts: 492
Likes received: 60
Joined: 5th February, 2016, 11:24 pm
Country: Australia (au)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby ConnorM » 18th March, 2017, 2:15 am

Lightbringer wrote:
ConnorM wrote:
Lightbringer wrote:Pity, current Visa/Green Card holders are allowed in BECAUSE of the judges. Trump's order blocked them as well. Look up your facts.

Banning Iran was publicity stunt to gain favor with Israel. I have a bridge to sell you if you think otherwise. There is not a single terrorist in history with Iranian origins. Therefore we say "Iran is funding terrorists".

You're talking about a country that was using child soldiers to clear minefields thirty years ago. Yeah, I'm not buying "There is not a single terrorist in history with Iranian origins".


That's an awfully twisted version of events. The age of consent is 15 in Iran, and that's not just about sex. During Iran's war with Iraq, 15 to 18 year old teenagers volunteered to fight for their country and legally they had the right. Using the buzz word "child soldiers" does nothing here. NO ONE was forced to serve. So whether it was clearing mind fields or simply fighting in a war, you are looking at the issue with an American viewpoint and refusing to see outside the box.

In fact, there was a 16 year old teenager who is commonly known as Shahid Fahmideh (Shahid means martyr) who was the only thing between an Iraqi tank destroying his village, so he grabbed a grenade belt and tucked it on and dashed under the tank. The tank was destroyed and his village was saved. The day of his death is official "teenager day" in Iran to honor him.

And the part about no terrorist ever having Iranian nationality is true.

Is that why they used human-wave tactics to clear minefields? I don't care if those children were volunteers, they were sent in Napoleonic-era lines against dug-in Iraqi forces armed with machine guns and mustard gas, and were promptly slaughtered with no gains. Many times they'd be ordered to clear minefields by running through them. Maybe I'm just not as callous about the lives of children, but hey, what do I know about war anyways? It's not like my dad fought in one, and I've dedicated my life to studying it or anything.

About your story, the official version is that Fahmideh died during the Battle of Khorramshahr, which is a major city and most certainly not "his village", given that he was from Qom, hundreds of miles away. Further, his heroic actions managed to only disable the tank's treads, because grenades, contrary to what movies will tell you, can't actually destroy a main battle tank. His sacrifice only worked due to the incompetence of the Iraqi army, who figured that the Iranians had mined the street, so they halted their armored column.

But really, how many of those child soldiers didn't have to die? The Coalition mopped the floor with the Iraqi army three years later, in many cases using the exact same equipment that Iran used during the Iran-Iraq war, and yet the US-led Coalition lost a grand total of 147 soldiers to Iraqi fire, fighting against 600,000 Iraqi soldiers, whereas Iran lost between 200,000 and 800,000 soldiers, including children as young as 13, to similarly sized Iraqi armies. Maybe I'm not "refusing to see outside the box" because the Iranian army was a callous, inefficient and incompetent force that pumped up child soldiers on promises of heaven and martyrdom and then sent them to their completely avoidable deaths pointlessly in ineffective human-wave attacks over and over trying to make the Iraqi army run out of bullets rather than pulling their heads out of their asses and actually fighting the Iraqis using things like "tactics" and "strategy". But of course, what do Americans know about war? We only crushed Iraq's armed forces decisively in a short war that lost less than two hundred soldiers after the best your vaunted suicide-bomber children could do in eight years was manage a blood-soaked draw.

Now, I will admit that my view point is different than yours. Given that I'm the son of an American soldier who fought in the War in Afghanistan, and that I knew soldiers who died from those fucking IEDs that were made with Iranian artillery shells, maybe I'm little skeptical about your protestations that Iran doesn't support terrorism.

Also, if no Iranian has ever been a terrorist, how'd the Cinema Rex fire get started, anyway?
User avatar
ConnorM
Sir Conor the Incompetent
 
Posts: 318
Likes received: 65
Joined: 14th December, 2013, 11:21 pm
Location: NY
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Togetik » 18th March, 2017, 5:02 am

I kind of fail to see how a country using child volunteers for their army during a specific conflict really lines up with terrorism at all, unless you're taking a leap from "Lets children fight in wars" to "actively terrorists"
User avatar
Togetik
Member
 
Posts: 492
Likes received: 60
Joined: 5th February, 2016, 11:24 pm
Country: Australia (au)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Lightbringer » 18th March, 2017, 7:30 am

ConnorM wrote:
Lightbringer wrote:
ConnorM wrote:
Lightbringer wrote:Pity, current Visa/Green Card holders are allowed in BECAUSE of the judges. Trump's order blocked them as well. Look up your facts.

Banning Iran was publicity stunt to gain favor with Israel. I have a bridge to sell you if you think otherwise. There is not a single terrorist in history with Iranian origins. Therefore we say "Iran is funding terrorists".

You're talking about a country that was using child soldiers to clear minefields thirty years ago. Yeah, I'm not buying "There is not a single terrorist in history with Iranian origins".


That's an awfully twisted version of events. The age of consent is 15 in Iran, and that's not just about sex. During Iran's war with Iraq, 15 to 18 year old teenagers volunteered to fight for their country and legally they had the right. Using the buzz word "child soldiers" does nothing here. NO ONE was forced to serve. So whether it was clearing mind fields or simply fighting in a war, you are looking at the issue with an American viewpoint and refusing to see outside the box.

In fact, there was a 16 year old teenager who is commonly known as Shahid Fahmideh (Shahid means martyr) who was the only thing between an Iraqi tank destroying his village, so he grabbed a grenade belt and tucked it on and dashed under the tank. The tank was destroyed and his village was saved. The day of his death is official "teenager day" in Iran to honor him.

And the part about no terrorist ever having Iranian nationality is true.

Is that why they used human-wave tactics to clear minefields? I don't care if those children were volunteers, they were sent in Napoleonic-era lines against dug-in Iraqi forces armed with machine guns and mustard gas, and were promptly slaughtered with no gains. Many times they'd be ordered to clear minefields by running through them. Maybe I'm just not as callous about the lives of children, but hey, what do I know about war anyways? It's not like my dad fought in one, and I've dedicated my life to studying it or anything.

About your story, the official version is that Fahmideh died during the Battle of Khorramshahr, which is a major city and most certainly not "his village", given that he was from Qom, hundreds of miles away. Further, his heroic actions managed to only disable the tank's treads, because grenades, contrary to what movies will tell you, can't actually destroy a main battle tank. His sacrifice only worked due to the incompetence of the Iraqi army, who figured that the Iranians had mined the street, so they halted their armored column.

But really, how many of those child soldiers didn't have to die? The Coalition mopped the floor with the Iraqi army three years later, in many cases using the exact same equipment that Iran used during the Iran-Iraq war, and yet the US-led Coalition lost a grand total of 147 soldiers to Iraqi fire, fighting against 600,000 Iraqi soldiers, whereas Iran lost between 200,000 and 800,000 soldiers, including children as young as 13, to similarly sized Iraqi armies. Maybe I'm not "refusing to see outside the box" because the Iranian army was a callous, inefficient and incompetent force that pumped up child soldiers on promises of heaven and martyrdom and then sent them to their completely avoidable deaths pointlessly in ineffective human-wave attacks over and over trying to make the Iraqi army run out of bullets rather than pulling their heads out of their asses and actually fighting the Iraqis using things like "tactics" and "strategy". But of course, what do Americans know about war? We only crushed Iraq's armed forces decisively in a short war that lost less than two hundred soldiers after the best your vaunted suicide-bomber children could do in eight years was manage a blood-soaked draw.

Now, I will admit that my view point is different than yours. Given that I'm the son of an American soldier who fought in the War in Afghanistan, and that I knew soldiers who died from those fucking IEDs that were made with Iranian artillery shells, maybe I'm little skeptical about your protestations that Iran doesn't support terrorism.

Also, if no Iranian has ever been a terrorist, how'd the Cinema Rex fire get started, anyway?


I'm well versed in Iran/Persian history, however I haven't particularly looked into the details of the said war. What you are not considering is the fact that Iraq declared war right after Iran went through a revolution. Which means there was no leadership, no real military or generals (as they escaped with the Shah) and the entirety of Iran's army at the beginning was volunteers following the lead of veterans and military people who did not escape during the revolution. So of course they were leagues less competent than modern American army. Not to mention Iran was a lone wolf and Iraq got support from US, France, UK and the entire Arab league.

The war lasted for almost 8 years and Iran was utterly losing in the first years and it was the overwhelming number of volunteers that turned the tide as well as establishing a proper government after the revolution. Admittedly the Shah had filled the nation's armories, but there were simply not enough soldiers to wield them, hence the volunteers. I don't necessarily agree with using teenagers in wars, but its far from a comparison to terrorism.

Also lets not mix up war crimes and revolutionaries with "terror". Cinema Rex was that, not an act of terrorism. Many despicable events happened in independence war and civil war in America, yet you don't see anyone calling them acts of terrorism. Because they are not. The distinction between them is hard but its definitely there. For someone who knows so much about war, you should be able to tell the difference.
User avatar
Lightbringer
Member
 
First name: Lucas
Posts: 361
Likes received: 19
Joined: 16th September, 2016, 5:02 pm
Location: Italian vagabond on pilgrimage
Country: Germany (de)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby ConnorM » 18th March, 2017, 1:36 pm

Lightbringer wrote:Also lets not mix up war crimes and revolutionaries with "terror". Cinema Rex was that, not an act of terrorism. Many despicable events happened in independence war and civil war in America, yet you don't see anyone calling them acts of terrorism. Because they are not. The distinction between them is hard but its definitely there. For someone who knows so much about war, you should be able to tell the difference.

"Terrorism" comes from a revolution. The word itself started in the English language because of the proponents of the Terror during the French Revolution, such as Maximilien Robespierre. Terrorism refers to, to use the dictionary definition, "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims". The Cinema Rex fire, being an unlawful use of violence and intimidation against civilians in the pursuit of political aims, was an act of terrorism according to what terrorism actually means. It's a funny thing, the difference between "Terrorist" and "Revolutionary", often times, there isn't one.
User avatar
ConnorM
Sir Conor the Incompetent
 
Posts: 318
Likes received: 65
Joined: 14th December, 2013, 11:21 pm
Location: NY
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby ConnorM » 18th March, 2017, 2:22 pm

My point is that saying a blanket statement like "No terrorist has ever been of Iranian origin" is quite silly. Yes, the Cinema Rex fire was an act of terrorism, both by the definition of terrorism, and by what media reported it at the time and continues to report it as. (1) (2)
Revolutionaries don't get a free pass on being terrorists because they're revolutionaries. Further, I don't understand why you're blinding yourself in saying that Iran doesn't have terrorists. I'm a patriotic American, yes, and I love my country. I also recognize that Americans have been terrorists. Indeed, after the Civil War, there was an entire organization dedicated to the systematic terrorizing of American civilians in the South, which you've probably heard of, called the Ku Klux Klan. This organization committed illegal violence and intimidation against civilians to achieve political goals. In many cases it worked, as Congress was too busy bickering with the President in order to actually crack down on the KKK.

It's the same reason why the KKK is viewed in the United States along the same sort of lines as the Nazis are. No one is happy about them existing, but few people are going to claim that "America has never had terrorists" because that would simply be willfully ignorant of them.

So yes, as much as I'm surprised to ever say these words, Donald Trump is technically correct. Iran has had terrorists. However, being as he is Donald Trump, and therefore an idiot, he's decided to use this as a political tool. Why? Because the United States' populace at large severely distrusts Iran. We have been at odds with Iran ever since the Hostage Crisis, and I don't suspect that that will go away any time soon. Probably, it won't go away until Iran no longer has a theocratic oligarchy. Is it hypocritical that we ban Iranians but not, say, Saudis, when Saudi Arabia almost certainly supports many more terrorist organizations than Iran does? Of course it is, and I've mentioned this before. I'll remind you that when it comes to Donald Trump's stupidity (or the stupidity of his staffers, given that the buffoon doesn't actually read or draft any of this nonsense), we're on the same side. But don't pretend that Iran is some Utopia that's never done wrong, because that's just silly.
User avatar
ConnorM
Sir Conor the Incompetent
 
Posts: 318
Likes received: 65
Joined: 14th December, 2013, 11:21 pm
Location: NY
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby bluesunstorm » 18th March, 2017, 6:28 pm

Knope wrote:One thing that HAS to be put to bed as soon as possible is the notion that these outrageous tweets and allegations from Trump are intentional distractions.

This is not the case. He actually, genuinely believes these things.

We're talking about a guy who went on a hunt for Obama's birth certificate, and who's very publicly indulged in various far/alt-right conspiracy theories for years, if not decades.

Conservatives often try and spin it so that Hillary for example is somehow both an absolute moron AND an evil mastermind who's plotting the takeover of America. Well, you can't have it both ways. Sorry. Those ideas directly contradict one another. Is she an incompetent idiot, or an evil fascist, communist, aspiring dictator? Pick one, but she can't be both.

This also applies to Trump. Don't call him a moron and an ignoramus one second, and then when he does something stupid because he has absolutely no impulse control abandon that and accuse him of manufacturing ideas in a diabolical scheme to divert the media and American public from other problems.

Also worth noting that it's somewhat irrelevant whether or not these insane tweets and public statements are meant to act as distractions, as there's a great deal that can go on behind the scenes and in Washington that, while remaining unclassified, unprivileged knowledge, can go unnoticed by even the most politically dedicated and voracious people. Trying to keep up with absolutely everything that goes on can be hopeless and futile. We need to push for greater transparency and openness in governmental affairs, but more importantly we need to all try to raise the bar regarding what's considered newsworthy and generally worth knowing.

Someone doesn't have to be intelligent or artful to gain a large following. Trump is the perfect example of this. He made a big deal about President Obama's birth certificate - even though he clearly had no evidence to show Obama wasn't a US citizen - because he knew it would play on the racist, xenophobic, of Islamophobic prejudices held by certain white people who were severely bitter that "libtarded queer-lovin' commie Muslim 'Murica-hating terrorist" Obama won the presidency overwhelmingly, and that Trump could gain from this animus both professionally and politically. It's perfectly apparent that he's an incompetent idiot, but I doubt we'll ever see his approval rating drop much from where it is now, because he represents the anti-PC and authoritarian/capitalism-run-amok culture that so many white people in America yearn for. His budget proposals will harm a large portion of his voters, but I doubt they'll ever turn away from, and they will find a way to blame Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic Party as a whole instead.
I loves Kylie Minogue, rainbows, sprinkles, teddy bears, Lisa Frank, Hello Kitty, pop & dance music, and Lindsay Lohan movies.
User avatar
bluesunstorm
Member
 
First name: Casey
Posts: 687
Likes received: 4
Joined: 15th February, 2013, 4:32 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Lightbringer » 19th March, 2017, 6:04 am

ConnorM wrote:My point is that saying a blanket statement like "No terrorist has ever been of Iranian origin" is quite silly. Yes, the Cinema Rex fire was an act of terrorism, both by the definition of terrorism, and by what media reported it at the time and continues to report it as. (1) (2)
Revolutionaries don't get a free pass on being terrorists because they're revolutionaries. Further, I don't understand why you're blinding yourself in saying that Iran doesn't have terrorists. I'm a patriotic American, yes, and I love my country. I also recognize that Americans have been terrorists. Indeed, after the Civil War, there was an entire organization dedicated to the systematic terrorizing of American civilians in the South, which you've probably heard of, called the Ku Klux Klan. This organization committed illegal violence and intimidation against civilians to achieve political goals. In many cases it worked, as Congress was too busy bickering with the President in order to actually crack down on the KKK.

It's the same reason why the KKK is viewed in the United States along the same sort of lines as the Nazis are. No one is happy about them existing, but few people are going to claim that "America has never had terrorists" because that would simply be willfully ignorant of them.

So yes, as much as I'm surprised to ever say these words, Donald Trump is technically correct. Iran has had terrorists. However, being as he is Donald Trump, and therefore an idiot, he's decided to use this as a political tool. Why? Because the United States' populace at large severely distrusts Iran. We have been at odds with Iran ever since the Hostage Crisis, and I don't suspect that that will go away any time soon. Probably, it won't go away until Iran no longer has a theocratic oligarchy. Is it hypocritical that we ban Iranians but not, say, Saudis, when Saudi Arabia almost certainly supports many more terrorist organizations than Iran does? Of course it is, and I've mentioned this before. I'll remind you that when it comes to Donald Trump's stupidity (or the stupidity of his staffers, given that the buffoon doesn't actually read or draft any of this nonsense), we're on the same side. But don't pretend that Iran is some Utopia that's never done wrong, because that's just silly.


We don't need to stick to one issue here. There were important people inside that Cinema at the time, and its was like a coup than anything else. Not to mention we don't even know who started the fire, the government said it was the revolutionaries and the revolutionaries said it was the government. However the dictionary meaning of terrorism does not necessarily apply, same as dictionary meaning of words such as racism. Do you think this incident is similar to what happened in 9/11 and numerous terrorist attacks in France. Attack which don't serve any purpose but solely to murder people and inspire dread? Its was American intelligence who mentioned they don't have any terrorist with Iranian nationality in their database. It doesn't mean that they are no terrorist in Iran, it means no American has been harmed by one. And I don't count the actions of the government here. I don't any American has ever been killed by an Iranian terrorist.

I think United States has done a lot more than Iran in creating the distrust. Not only the US meddled the shit out of Iran during Shah's rule, it practically stole Iran's oil with outrageously cheap prices. As if that wasn't enough, soon after the revolution the US attempted a coup inside Iran's soil. On many occasions Iran has come half the way to mend this relation, but the US has refused to. The most recent being the opportunistic election of Rouhani and the effort his cabinet put into nuclear talks and relation with US in general. But Trump has destroyed all of that and actually made it worse. 4 Years of effort turned into nothing.

In the end Iran has tried to mend relations with the west numerous times, certainly more than any other Muslim country in the area. But for reasons, some known and some unknown, we have antagonized Iran more than most. Iranian people abroad cause very little problems and generally assimilate quite well. In fact Iranian Americans are one of the highest educated people in America with very low crime rate.

What's happening to Iran right now is nothing but political agenda. Antagonizing them gains favor with Israel and Israel's propaganda machine is working none stop to feed this. Did you know there are Jews living in absolute peace in Iran? They even have their own MP representing them in body of Iranian government. In fact here is an article saying they would rather live in Iran rather than in Israel and Netanyahu's corruption.

Iran's Jews on life inside Israel's 'enemy state': 'We feel secure and happy'

Another thing you need to know is that in terms of pure democracy, Iran is very democratic. Practically everything is decided by people's vote. Its probably more democratic than US' system, seeing a president can be chosen without popular vote. Let this sink in while knowing Saudi Arabians who have in fact killed over thousands of Americans inside America and their government is basically a king ruling by himself was not included in Trump's list.

I'm not taking side here, but if I'm honest, Iran's reactions to most events sometimes seems justified. We are literally and practically discriminating against them.
User avatar
Lightbringer
Member
 
First name: Lucas
Posts: 361
Likes received: 19
Joined: 16th September, 2016, 5:02 pm
Location: Italian vagabond on pilgrimage
Country: Germany (de)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby ConnorM » 19th March, 2017, 4:00 pm

Lightbringer wrote:We don't need to stick to one issue here. There were important people inside that Cinema at the time, and its was like a coup than anything else. Not to mention we don't even know who started the fire, the government said it was the revolutionaries and the revolutionaries said it was the government. However the dictionary meaning of terrorism does not necessarily apply, same as dictionary meaning of words such as racism. Do you think this incident is similar to what happened in 9/11 and numerous terrorist attacks in France. Attack which don't serve any purpose but solely to murder people and inspire dread? Its was American intelligence who mentioned they don't have any terrorist with Iranian nationality in their database. It doesn't mean that they are no terrorist in Iran, it means no American has been harmed by one. And I don't count the actions of the government here. I don't any American has ever been killed by an Iranian terrorist.

What makes you the arbiter of what makes a terrorist act? It literally and perfectly fits the dictionary definition of a terrorist act, and it has been called a terrorist act for the past forty years. But because it doesn't fit your argument, its no longer a terrorist act? It doesn't matter if it's not the exact same as a terrorist act that occurred in France, things can happen differently and still be in the same category. So yes, if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and fits every definition of a duck, it's probably a goddamned duck.

Now, as to the bit about Iranian-US relations, I'll say that while it's my opinion that the US should have handed the Shah over to the revolutionaries, this does not excuse them from taking the embassy. That a group in support of the revolution took the embassy and the US diplomatic staff hostage would, in other cases, count as an act of war against the US. Attacks on diplomats are a clear and valid casus belli dating back to the Greek Classical period. I do not proclaim that the United States is innocent.

However, as to your point about Iranian democracy, I'll mention that the Supreme Leader appoints the members of the Guardian Council, who choose who get to run for the Assembly of Experts, which doesn't seem so democratic to me, even more so than the Electoral College. Especially given that the Iranian Supreme Court says that the Assembly of Experts doesn't have the power to oversee the decisions of the Supreme Leader. As near as I can make an equivalent, this would be around the order of if the Supreme Court arbitrarily decided who the Electors in the College were, and if everyone on the Supreme Court didn't need Senate confirmation. Iran currently has no checks and balances on the Supreme Leader.

So yes, it is possible to win the popular vote in the United States without winning the presidency. This is due to the fact that the United States is a federal republic, not a democracy. It is designed so that the people who would otherwise not get a voice can have a voice if the majority are concentrated in one area of the country. Specifically, it was instituted to protect the smaller states from Virginia, which at that time had the greatest population. The smaller states didn't come close to having Virginia's population, but due to the Electoral College including the Senate's representatives as electors, the small states could gang up on the big states to prevent Virginia from constantly controlling both the House and the White House.
User avatar
ConnorM
Sir Conor the Incompetent
 
Posts: 318
Likes received: 65
Joined: 14th December, 2013, 11:21 pm
Location: NY
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Ebsy » 19th March, 2017, 6:42 pm

Image

Not good!
Will wrote:Eye contact is serious. Make sure you get tested for H-eye-V.
Thumper wrote:I've read washing machine manuals that aroused me more.
User avatar
Ebsy
EBay
 
Posts: 2661
Likes received: 28
Joined: 2nd June, 2012, 1:27 am
Location: Missouri

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Jacketh » 20th March, 2017, 6:58 am

Ebsy wrote:Image

Not good!


I really, really, hope the Dems don't screw up the primaries in 2020.

What is you opinion on Al Franken, Nick?
Image

ImageImageImage

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Jacketh
Administrator
 
First name: Jack
Posts: 9416
Likes received: 358
Joined: 12th June, 2012, 7:00 pm
Location: London
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Togetik » 20th March, 2017, 8:57 am

I wonder if the dems even can screw up the next election, trump is poison to the republican party even now and we're only a few months in. By the time he's up for election again, can anyone associated with him hope to keep their position in the face of his direct alienation of his voterbase?
User avatar
Togetik
Member
 
Posts: 492
Likes received: 60
Joined: 5th February, 2016, 11:24 pm
Country: Australia (au)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby bluesunstorm » 20th March, 2017, 3:19 pm

Togetik wrote:I wonder if the dems even can screw up the next election, trump is poison to the republican party even now and we're only a few months in. By the time he's up for election again, can anyone associated with him hope to keep their position in the face of his direct alienation of his voterbase?

Well, Bush won re-election against John Kerry - who was a very anodyne and sensible candidate. Incumbents tend to have the advantage amongst voters, and the last three presidents have all won re-election. If the economy is doing well in 2020, whether Trump has anything to do with that, could sway some voters in the middle to vote for him, who didn't last time. Trump could also win again by losing the popular vote due to his advantage with voters in certain states like Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa. He could even lose a few of those states and still win re-election. It's not a question of if Democratic Party can screw it up. I don't think they didn't this election either. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and the Democratic primary voters chose her handily. The Republican Party also lost seats in Congress. Russia used fake news stories and foreign Internet trolls to exploit the ideological rift between the center-left and far-left, and the FBI broke protocol one week before the election over stupid e-mails - that, of course, ended up being nothing. The last event is what was the nail in the coffin, and polling data shows this. Regardless of who the Democratic nominee is in 2020, I'm not assuming it's automatically going to be a cakewalk - regardless of Trump's approval rating at the time.
I loves Kylie Minogue, rainbows, sprinkles, teddy bears, Lisa Frank, Hello Kitty, pop & dance music, and Lindsay Lohan movies.
User avatar
bluesunstorm
Member
 
First name: Casey
Posts: 687
Likes received: 4
Joined: 15th February, 2013, 4:32 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Pity » 20th March, 2017, 3:29 pm

Former DNC chair Donna Brazile finally admits that she did leak debate questions to Hillary Clinton after months of lying and denying it.

Image
Image
User avatar
Pity
hotty & disgraced member
 
First name: Jesse
Posts: 2033
Likes received: 246
Joined: 19th July, 2015, 11:50 pm
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Country: United States (us)

Re: US Politics: Trump Administration & 115th Congress

Unread postby Ebsy » 20th March, 2017, 4:46 pm

Something not a lot of people are talking about: Paul Ryan doesn't seem to have to votes to pass the AHCA (Obamacare repeal and "replace") through the House. The vote is scheduled on Thursday, and we already have 17 firm No's (mix of moderates and hardline conservatives) with another 30 or so members up in the air and many with no recorded position at all. He can only afford to lose 21 members of his caucus on this vote, leaving his with a very narrow path.
Will wrote:Eye contact is serious. Make sure you get tested for H-eye-V.
Thumper wrote:I've read washing machine manuals that aroused me more.
User avatar
Ebsy
EBay
 
Posts: 2661
Likes received: 28
Joined: 2nd June, 2012, 1:27 am
Location: Missouri

PreviousNext

Recently active
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Java1 [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 2 guests