Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 100

On February 10 2019 23:10 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + On February 10 2019 14:41 Santafairy wrote: DPRK obviously has to open up and KJU knows and wants it to happen. similar position as to gorbachev's was if you know history. you're right it's not a message of support for socialism but of optimism for the expansion of market economy and the future of investment and development KJU is more like Stalin than Gorbachev. Its like Trump is calling Stalin "little mustache boy" but you know later on they hug it out and send each other love letters, so its all OK, just a buddy sitcom, even though one of the stars just happens to be someone who tortures and imprisons thousands of innocent people.

you want to kill KJU? invade? regime change? how about nukes, tactical nuke, or have china do it for us in exchange for giving them taiwan. wow KJU tortures and imprisons people. thanks for that insight nobody knew that. that's like the most basic level 1 information. that's like the ante, that's as far as you've gotten into this hand, you didn't even get dealt cards yet. this after like a century of US leaders either shaking hands with or removing from power/assassinating any number of assholes all over the middle east and asia - either way to equally critical heckling from armchair know-nothings. if he tweets "rocketman" you'll hate it, if he tweets rocket economy you'll hate it. if he tweets they'll become an economic powerhouse you hate it, if he tweeted they'll be poor forever until everyone dies of starvation you'd hate it, we get it, you hate trump, it's not a complicated hobby.

stalin basically invented the soviet system and probably oversaw its worst times. gorbachev was working specifically against the inertia of a longstanding bureaucracy and system that was inherently conservative, hardline, and concerned with its own preservation (same situation now facing DPRK). it took the cooperation of or influence of outside forces to achieve gorbachev's revolution. KJU is the third generation to inherit this system. DPRK is now the last holdout in east asia not to industrialize. even china. EVEN CHINA. now either the young educated in switzerland leader who's cunning enough not to have been assassinated on his first day or 8 years on the job understands something about this, or we can reduce him to tyrant that kills innocents and then not have to understand the world any deeper.

no nobody LIKES KJU. but learn realpolitik. there is no switch that anyone can flip to make everything all better. not trump, not china, not the UN, not the people of either korea, not even whoever the DPRK leader is. again this is not a defense of KJU. but it's not like the famines of the 90s. defection is decreasing - this is not an endorsement of KJU but a scientific measure that the risk/reward for many people has changed. in other words fewer people think they have higher EV from fleeing than just staying. market economy, even if not acknowledged, has expanded. DPRK treating Samsung CEO like he was Moon's VP. talks for sanction exemptions for inter (intra?) korean investment. economic interdependence cools hostility (in addition to those US bases in 70 countries mentioned earlier because nobody wants to attack someone when it means attacking the US). this is what everyone wants and when you want something to happen then you say it and believe it, not say the opposite and believe it's impossible.

On February 11 2019 16:15 Santafairy wrote: wow KJU tortures and imprisons people. thanks for that insight nobody knew that.

I have no idea if you know the above or not when you, lol, compare KJU to Gorbachev. KJU is arguably the actual nut-low most evil leader on the planet right and now and you're actually comparing him to someone who so genuinely believed in feeding his people that he was willing to end the arms race that effectively brought an end to the cold war. Just complete polar opposites.

if he tweets "rocketman" you'll hate it, if he tweets rocket economy you'll hate it.

Yeah, we've been over this before, there's a middle ground between childish name-calling and 'love letters'. Its not hard to find.

gorbachev was working specifically against the inertia of a longstanding bureaucracy and system that was inherently conservative, hardline, and concerned with its own preservation (same situation now facing DPRK).

Its not remotely the same situation. KJU isn't remotely 'working against' the 'bureaucracy' of North Korea. He's not working against the totalitarian state that he rules as a god-king. Negotiations with Trump was little more than a photo-op. The few concessions Trump got from him didn't happen. Some older missile bases were closed, but KJU just started building up new secret bases.

Never did I say we nuke or invade North Korea. We absolutely need peace talks and eventual easing of sanctions. But its obvious neither Trump nor KJU are doing that in good faith.

+ Show Spoiler +

That is certainly a definition of Beastmode. Some real life GoT shit. How do you say Go Yellow Jackets in French?

By the way:

I am declaring that Ô is the new written symbol for a woman's vagina. It is difficult to detail the outer and inner labia through written word so some people may wonder like is that the actual vagina hole? Because that would be pretty big in relation to the clitoris. But, we shouldn't be too prejudiced towards big vagina'd women anyways. Anyways, it really infuriates me that girls are getting their clitorises mutilated at young ages around the world. Something should be done about that. Also, for his female rights efforts in Rojava I like to spell it Abdullah Ôcalan sometimes but I don't know if that is disrespectful towards him or not. Also, dipping my toes into women's rights efforts can get confusing especially when transgendered rights get involved. I usually just revert to the idea of Being Kind but sometimes I don't know what that means.

On February 12 2019 05:15 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + On February 11 2019 16:15 Santafairy wrote: wow KJU tortures and imprisons people. thanks for that insight nobody knew that. I have no idea if you know the above or not when you, lol, compare KJU to Gorbachev. KJU is arguably the actual nut-low most evil leader on the planet right and now and you're actually comparing him to someone who so genuinely believed in feeding his people that he was willing to end the arms race that effectively brought an end to the cold war. Just complete polar opposites.

wow so you're arguing he ended a tensely heated arms race and led to the dissolution of a close to century old communist regime for fundamentally economically motivated reasons

yeah there would be no similarity there to what we're talking about with north korea, of course, my mistake.

nobody equated KJU and Gorbachev. they are in a similar situation on this point. you don't have to indignantly deny that for fear of equivocating the two men, or for fear that people won't duly recognize the virtuous intensity of your disavowal of concentration camps. this nuance-less simplemindedness will keep truths from reaching you.

On February 12 2019 05:15 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + if he tweets "rocketman" you'll hate it, if he tweets rocket economy you'll hate it. Yeah, we've been over this before, there's a middle ground between childish name-calling and 'love letters'. Its not hard to find.   gorbachev was working specifically against the inertia of a longstanding bureaucracy and system that was inherently conservative, hardline, and concerned with its own preservation (same situation now facing DPRK). Its not remotely the same situation. KJU isn't remotely 'working against' the 'bureaucracy' of North Korea. He's not working against the totalitarian state that he rules as a god-king. Negotiations with Trump was little more than a photo-op. The few concessions Trump got from him didn't happen. Some older missile bases were closed, but KJU just started building up new secret bases. Never did I say we nuke or invade North Korea. We absolutely need peace talks and eventual easing of sanctions. But its obvious neither Trump nor KJU are doing that in good faith.

the fact that he's interested in holding onto his own power (synonymous with his life in this case) does not preclude him wanting economic prosperity and the welfare of his citizens. they're actually coincident in some respects. if he had come in during his first year and gone "we capitalist democracy now" or whatever and destabilized the country, or created millions of fleeing refugees, or caused a civil war, or caused the military or another rival to assassinate and usurp him, destabilizing the system which is built around the kim dynasty. and we really don't want a nuclear state destabilizing. the ship he is captain of can't turn on a whim, he's not the god you think or he wouldn't have to work so hard suspecting and finding and killing rivals or disloyals and reeducating malcontents. and that goes for no matter who the leader was, even if you can imagine your most liberal and progressive person somehow magically became leader instead of KJU, he'd get killed within a week and the suffering from the resulting disorder would be worse than what you have now. this isn't a defense of the status quo it's an observation of reality.

in order for him to stay in power, people have to be well enough off that they don't have nothing to lose in which case you face a coup or revolution (this is why defector rates are applicable). rational dictator applies.

So, this may be a rough one too since I feel like I am running out of time but I wanted to get it out there because it's important:

Rojava Timeline

What jumped out at me:

March 2018: Turkish invasion ends with occupation of Afrin city. 400-500 civilians are killed[14], and 300,000 civilians internally displaced[15]. Turkish-backed militias continue to impose sharia law, kidnap, torture and execute civilians, and commit human rights violations possibly amounting to war crimes, per Amnesty International[16].

Sharia Law

I had no idea it was that bad.

Horrifying

The 60 Min. interview with journalist Lara Logan about how she was brutally raped in public was particularly illuminating/disgusting

Yeah if you want to punch somebody it's probably better idea to punch a Muslim than a Nazi. In Finland Muslims are about 2.5% of population and they commit 70% of rapes where the victim is underage.

I don't think KJU compares to Trump in the evil catagory, Trumps literally enacting policy that is destroying the world-global warming. Concentration camps are not nearly as bad as the effects of global warming when it comes to suffering, Not to mention ramping up the threat of nuclear aggression by getting rid of the arms treaty that ban's mid range missiles. Imo Trump is the worst leader in human history; because of his stance on global warming. If you think about it, and look at the effects, nothing comes this close in the amount of suffering and it's ease of prevention.

On February 12 2019 17:44 Santafairy wrote: wow so you're arguing he ended a tensely heated arms race and led to the dissolution of a close to century old communist regime for fundamentally economically motivated reasons yeah there would be no similarity there to what we're talking about with north korea, of course, my mistake.

You're doing this weird thing where you accuse me of being tired and cliched when I'm pointing out KJU's atrocities, but then apparently its also so obvious KJU is 'dissolving' his communist regime for humanitarian reasons that you're going max sarcasm.

nobody equated KJU and Gorbachev. they are in a similar situation on this point

The only similarity is that they are respective leaders of failed communist-in-name states. North Korea's government is closer to something from ancient Egypt than the Soviet Union. In terms of how they *actually* help their people they move in polar opposite directions.

the fact that he's interested in holding onto his own power (synonymous with his life in this case) does not preclude him wanting economic prosperity and the welfare of his citizens. they're actually coincident in some respects. if he had come in during his first year and gone "we capitalist democracy now" or whatever and destabilized the country, or created millions of fleeing refugees, or caused a civil war, or caused the military or another rival to assassinate and usurp him, destabilizing the system which is built around the kim dynasty. and we really don't want a nuclear state destabilizing. the ship he is captain of can't turn on a whim, he's not the god you think or he wouldn't have to work so hard suspecting and finding and killing rivals or disloyals and reeducating malcontents. and that goes for no matter who the leader was, even if you can imagine your most liberal and progressive person somehow magically became leader instead of KJU, he'd get killed within a week and the suffering from the resulting disorder would be worse than what you have now. this isn't a defense of the status quo it's an observation of reality.

This is just a logic fail of a type that frequently is used to justify the actions of authoritarians. Dictator commits atrocities to gain/solidify power, rebellions are formed in reaction to those atrocities, dictator uses rebellions to justify more atrocities. And you're actually arguing that KJU can't transition to a democratic, or even just a non-slave state, because he's too busy 'working hard' assassinating people. Juggling democracy and purges is just too many waves for captain Kim.

in order for him to stay in power, people have to be well enough off that they don't have nothing to lose in which case you face a coup or revolution (this is why defector rates are applicable). rational dictator applies.

See that theory doesn't explain countries such as, uh, North Korea, the last 70 years.

On February 12 2019 22:59 Stroggoz wrote: I don't think KJU compares to Trump in the evil catagory, Trumps literally enacting policy that is destroying the world-global warming. Concentration camps are not nearly as bad as the effects of global warming when it comes to suffering, Not to mention ramping up the threat of nuclear aggression by getting rid of the arms treaty that ban's mid range missiles. Imo Trump is the worst leader in human history; because of his stance on global warming. If you think about it, and look at the effects, nothing comes this close in the amount of suffering and it's ease of prevention.

Yeah but when we think of evil we tend to think about the intention to cause harm or repress information of harm that is being caused or has been caused. If there's one thing I can give the benefit of the doubt to Trump for, it's the fact that he has no fucking clue what global warming is. In a rational world that is not hell-bent on its own destruction, a global leader should of course know and take action, but we don't live in that world. This is a world where the masses have been so dumbed down that they allowed some guy whose idea of running for president materialized as he set out to outcompete Gwen Stefani in a reality tv show. Sure, he has to be held responsible for the impacts of his ignorance, but there are clearer things to point to that we know he does know about and which make him qualify for that same award. Bush is pretty hard to outcompete, but Trump's insane military budget and foreign intervention, his pulling out of troops in Syria at a critical time, coupled with the engineered migrant crisis, government shutdown and related harm caused by his racism might end up being enough on their own.

On February 12 2019 20:01 Obannon112 wrote: Yeah if you want to punch somebody it's probably better idea to punch a Muslim than a Nazi. In Finland Muslims are about 2.5% of population and they commit 70% of rapes where the victim is underage.

hahahaha thanks for proving my point su beautifully, what do you think about your "punch ha nazi" thing now Loco?

game, set, match

that's just stupid baal

On February 13 2019 00:32 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + On February 12 2019 17:44 Santafairy wrote: wow so you're arguing he ended a tensely heated arms race and led to the dissolution of a close to century old communist regime for fundamentally economically motivated reasons yeah there would be no similarity there to what we're talking about with north korea, of course, my mistake. You're doing this weird thing where you accuse me of being tired and cliched when I'm pointing out KJU's atrocities, but then apparently its also so obvious KJU is 'dissolving' his communist regime for humanitarian reasons that you're going max sarcasm.

you're not reading. skipped.

On February 13 2019 00:32 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + nobody equated KJU and Gorbachev. they are in a similar situation on this point The only similarity is that they are respective leaders of failed communist-in-name states. North Korea's government is closer to something from ancient Egypt than the Soviet Union. In terms of how they *actually* help their people they move in polar opposite directions.

you're correct, the starting point of 80s USSR was much better than the DPRK today. there are other factors including population and land mass which make the kind of long-term DPRK style centralized control impossible somewhere like the USSR, DPRK is unique in the world and maybe history. yes, there are differences, what you've said amounts to DPRK and USSR are not identical. wow amazing thanks for disproving all the people who thought otherwise.

I'm guessing with Gorbachev you're only thinking about the results, because Gorbachev's career (and the USSR) are over and part of the past and we know what happened. but you're not taking into consideration the process of how they got there, further KJU is still around and will probably be for a while and we don't know what the future will hold. we're in the thick of it right now, think back to the time, think back to uncertainty, think about:
-Gorbachev trying to convince his counterpart of his sincerity
-Bush not knowing what to make of Gorbachev's motives, what the ulterior strategems might've been
-Bush dealing with pressure from his administration to take a hard line on the USSR, not to take Gorby at his word
-Gorbachev trying to negotiate concessions like SDI
-Bush wanting to appear tough both to his apparent rival and for domestic political reasons
the best result, the result you want, doesn't just happen automatically, it takes working through the issues to actually achieve something

OR

I'm an idiot and there's nothing to learn from history

On February 13 2019 00:32 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + the fact that he's interested in holding onto his own power (synonymous with his life in this case) does not preclude him wanting economic prosperity and the welfare of his citizens. they're actually coincident in some respects. if he had come in during his first year and gone "we capitalist democracy now" or whatever and destabilized the country, or created millions of fleeing refugees, or caused a civil war, or caused the military or another rival to assassinate and usurp him, destabilizing the system which is built around the kim dynasty. and we really don't want a nuclear state destabilizing. the ship he is captain of can't turn on a whim, he's not the god you think or he wouldn't have to work so hard suspecting and finding and killing rivals or disloyals and reeducating malcontents. and that goes for no matter who the leader was, even if you can imagine your most liberal and progressive person somehow magically became leader instead of KJU, he'd get killed within a week and the suffering from the resulting disorder would be worse than what you have now. this isn't a defense of the status quo it's an observation of reality. This is just a logic fail of a type that frequently is used to justify the actions of authoritarians. Dictator commits atrocities to gain/solidify power, rebellions are formed in reaction to those atrocities, dictator uses rebellions to justify more atrocities. And you're actually arguing that KJU can't transition to a democratic, or even just a non-slave state, because he's too busy 'working hard' assassinating people. Juggling democracy and purges is just too many waves for captain Kim.

you're getting it now, he wants economic prosperity but not at the expense of his own position. and this isn't unique to him, it would be true of whoever inherited the leadership position there. your attitude is like going to hell and blaming people for not being angels. like is there any point here except sit on your hands and wait for the DPRK to do exactly what the US wants and then everything will be peachy? because that's been tried

this isn't a defense of the status quo it's an observation of reality.

here's a situation for you: KJU announces democracy 1 year into his reign, hardliners loyal to his father from the army kill him, take his place, and to alleviate food demand that they can't meet because you underestimate how hard anything would be to run in a state as precarious as the DPRK, execute everyone in camps. or alternatively they also execute another 100k suspected sympathizers just for the hell of it and to cement new order. or alternatively oops that backfired, and now half the army mutineed because they don't like massacring civilians and there's a civil war. but at least we could say KJU did the right thing.

now no, not every coup has to end up that way but that's the risk if whoever makes a move didn't consolidate power just right

for the berlin wall and iron curtain it only took 1-2 generations. and despite the gulag system it's harder to control such a wide and disparate population as the USSR the same way you can control a dense homogeneous population like the DPRK.

it's actually a serious problem because we (west) always assumed economic and political freedom went hand in hand, but then we look at vietnam and china. it's weird the middle east and central and south america can have revolutions like it's nothing, like I always see people flooding the streets in some new country whether it's venezuela or egypt or turkey or whatever. the memory of that is just so distant for the DPRK I don't know that it could ever happen.

I think China being a superpower makes their case different, they can be self-sustaining, everything is THEIR sphere of influence. but the DPRK because of size should become much more interdependent (as they already are with food aid and so on) when it develops.

also in the case of China the government/intelligence is coordinating. in the DPRK the people are much closer to the government in terms of like a technology gap which should be good at least. if you're an activist in China, even if you're a group, what chance do you really have against the party machine of a state populated by 1.3 billion. but that's just an aside.

The palestinian grand mufti had close relationship to nazi's and eventually the plan was to wipe out the jewish population in middle east. Now most people in Norway are pro-palestine because settlements cover 3% of west bank and because of rumours that israelis are brutal. Thou the Israeli army is far more human than international troops in Afghanistan. People forget that if the arabs won any of the wars they started the entire jewish population would be executed. So i support the only democracy in the middle east.

On February 13 2019 04:59 Liquid`Drone wrote: that's just typical baal

FYP. By the way, Baal is very opposed to being called a fascist enabler, but look at how fast he laps that racist shit up.

On February 13 2019 08:51 Santafairy wrote: wow so you're arguing he ended a tensely heated arms race and led to the dissolution of a close to century old communist regime for fundamentally economically motivated reasons yeah there would be no similarity there to what we're talking about with north korea, of course, my mistake.

See you're doing it again, and its getting tiresome. You claim Gorbachev and KJU are in the 'same situation', I point out that the situation isn't remotely similar since the governments are in reality completely different (North Korea is essentially a monarchy while the soviet Union was an actual communist state (if corrupt)), instead of countering the point that ruins your argument you just get angry that I'm stating the obvious.

I'm guessing with Gorbachev you're only thinking about the results

Well the fact that Gorbachev actually brought results and provided relief for his people (temporarily at least) and that KJU hasn't at all done so is pretty important. But even if take your previous statements as charitably as possible and assume you merely meant that KJU *could be* the next Gorbachev (as in if he would completely change his motives, personality, and discover the concept of morality), its still basically too late because KJU has already straight up murdered people.

here's a situation for you: KJU announces democracy 1 year into his reign, hardliners loyal to his father from the army kill him, take his place, and to alleviate food demand that they can't meet because you underestimate how hard anything would be to run in a state as precarious as the DPRK, execute everyone in camps. or alternatively they also execute another 100k suspected sympathizers just for the hell of it and to cement new order. or alternatively oops that backfired, and now half the army mutineed because they don't like massacring civilians and there's a civil war. but at least we could say KJU did the right thing.

That is 'a situation', but certainly not likely as *if* KJU legitimately converts his country to democracy (allows election monitoring), frees the slaves, and dismantles his nuclear arsenal he would have the full support (military and otherwise) of basically the rest of the world. Also, when free speech is brutally oppressed, its difficult to tell who is actually 'hardline' in the sense that they are pro-totalitarian regimes and those trying to fight against it. From the outside it seems as if Kim has complete control of his government ideologically. Its completely unlike the Soviet Union where the hardliners were a very real and public threat.

Seemingly basic moral question to anyone:

Say you're pretty sure that a leader of a foreign nation has murdered someone, a civilian. The leader didn't necessarily do the deed themselves but the evidence is pretty damning that they at least ordered it. You can't be 100% sure, but its looking bad, say 97%.

Do you still:

1. Shake hands with that leader
2. Trade with that leader's nation
3. provide military assistance to that leader/nation (which is most likely mutually beneficial)
4. allow your country to complete in the Olympics when that leader hosts

side questions:
5. Does it matter what type of civilian it is (journalist, prostitute, religious leader)
6. Does it matter where that civilian is actually from

-------------

The more I think about it the more I feel like the answer to all six question is no, even though the status quo answer to all six questions seems to be yes. The trickiest one I think is 2 going back to the argument Baal and Loco were having about sanctions essentially causing starvation. If you refuse to trade, there should at least be some sort of secondary plan to ensure an inflow of food/medicine to a country that needs it.