The purpose being to stop the bombing of civilians by a murderous regime backed by Russia.
Except that the only country actually bombing the rebels is Russia, the US doesnt like the rebels but also wants to topple Assad... so basically they bomb rebels when it doesnt help Assad directly and they "accidently" bomb Assads troops from time to time, all this while the US ally, Saudi Arabia funds the rebels.
So the no fly zone is spitting in Russias face and helping the rebels (Isis and the rest of the Jihadist groups)
On November 10 2016 19:08 Rapoza wrote:
So... is ww3 incoming?
Hillary Clinton is not a good candidate. Most of the charges against her are way overblown, many just complete fabrications, but its true she is simply not a good candidate. Still, you at least know what you're getting. Whatever she says, whatever her opponents say, her foreign policy will almost certainly be a continuation of Bill Clinton's or Obama's.
With Trump's foreign policy you have a mystery box. Its part mystery box because he has absolutely no experience, part because he's a pathological liar. Some people think nuclear weapons + mystery box is OK, as long as you can stick it to liberal political correctness. I do not, in fact I think its the furthest thing from OK.
this.
Also, the idea that Clinton would start WW3 because of the no fly zone position is just strategical counter to what the democrats were saying about Trump having the nuclear codes. I just can't believe that so many people repeat it like it's a plausible scenario. One can find a ton of careless (?) quotes of Trump in regards to nuclear weapons but nothing on behalf of Clinton that suggests she's a trigger happy WW3 enthusiast (links anyone?). Oh well I guess we'll see how the new president does
On November 09 2016 22:05 LikeASet wrote:
I believe most people's reasons for voting either are probably shallow.
...The election results are making me feel warm inside because I live in California and I'm surrounded by retarded social justice warrior millennials, many of them coming from schools like Berkely, Davis, etc. ...
...Anyways I feel like Trump getting elected is a big FU to social justice warrior culture and an "everyone stop being such pussies" kind of statement...
Idk bud, you might be the shallow one based on this post.
Millennials complaining about other SJW millennials reminds me of how people used to bash "emo kids" back in the day. Great for you man, I hope you found the validation you needed. Meanwhile there are people legitimately concerned for the environment, national surveillance, the supreme court justice seats, and a billion other things. Just people being shallow, I guess.
(For what it's worth I voted for neither HRC or Trump)
I really hoped Trump wouldn't win, but he did and we must respect the office. The election results are a real lesson in empathy. The writing was on the wall during the primaries, Trump had a snowballing, diehard fanbase and the rational left believed people would actually care about stuff like blatant sexual harassment. Fact of the matter is people are willing to look past it when their jobs, livelihood, and identity are on the line.
How the left feels now is exactly how racist nutjobs felt when we elected Obama in 08 - talk about secession, emigration, murder, etc. None of that happened, instead they came out in droves on election day. In 4 years, the left can respond similarly.
So by your logic, everyone who voted for trump is not concerned with the environment, national defence, etc. GJ oversimplifying the whole situation. Not like Hillary is a proven war monger or anything.
What the fuck are you talking about? You voted for a climate change denier. You're concerned with the environment how, exactly? I'm sure you're also concerned with women's rights as you also voted to take away their right to have an abortion. The list of stupid shit goes on, as we all know. Why? Because you felt "annoyed with some SJW people"? That's the equivalent of hiring a psychopath to shoot up a school because you were bullied by a small group of people and then patting yourself on the back for "winning".
The most disturbing part is how satisfied you are with yourself. No one with a functioning brain and a little compassion should be satisfied about [the results of] this election.
obviously Trumps stance on climate change is awful, on the other hand Hillary called fracking protesters cry babies and she was clearly bough by the industry so the alternative is better on the enviroment it wasnt a black and white difference and she was only going to pursue lobbying interests as usual.
These SJW arent just annoying the regressive left can be very dangerous, look at all the problems with Sweden and migration, and the shitstorm that will go in a few years in Germany, in Canada you are quickly losing free speech as its about to be legislated the use of non-binary gender pronounces mandatory and refusing to do so would be considered hate speech and punishable by law.
And yeah Trump is certainly an overkill but that is what happens when the left doesnt check itself and runs amok, as I said before this election, they are the ones empowering these ultra right demagoges
The purpose being to stop the bombing of civilians by a murderous regime backed by Russia.
Except that the only country actually bombing the rebels is Russia, the US doesnt like the rebels but also wants to topple Assad... so basically they bomb rebels when it doesnt help Assad directly and they "accidently" bomb Assads troops from time to time, all this while the US ally, Saudi Arabia funds the rebels.
So the no fly zone is spitting in Russias face and helping the rebels (Isis and the rest of the Jihadist groups)
I'm not going to say that any of the above is really false though of course "the rebels" aren't automatically Jihadists. Assad's regime is a muderous one, bombing innocent civilians. There's international recognition of this and there's plenty of Syrian pro-democracy resistance to him. But I'll admit at least that a no-fly zone isn't necessarily the best answer. The problem isn't that with the bombing stopping ISIS is free to take power, the problem is that Russia, being awful, flies their bombers anyway. So the US choices are to do nothing and be embarrassed, or shoot them down and start a war. So it's lose-lose.
But of course, none of those scenarios are swirling around in Donald Trump's head. His praise for Putin is a tip of the cap to a fellow alpha male not any kind of drive for diplomacy.
On November 11 2016 08:09 Baalim wrote:
Except that the only country actually bombing the rebels is Russia, the US doesnt like the rebels but also wants to topple Assad... so basically they bomb rebels when it doesnt help Assad directly and they "accidently" bomb Assads troops from time to time, all this while the US ally, Saudi Arabia funds the rebels.
So the no fly zone is spitting in Russias face and helping the rebels (Isis and the rest of the Jihadist groups)
Russia is bombing everything, using cheap dumb bombs and just carpeting entire sections of cities like Aleppo. Russia is broke and wants to help Assad on the cheap, which creates a ton of human suffering and death because they and Assad simply don't give a flying fuck about innocent civilian deaths. They are willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of innocent lives to achieve their goals.
Yes, the rebels aren't all good people, there are MANY different groups of rebels and the US isn't helping all of them. The Saudis are supplying certain Sunni rebel groups with arms and money. It's a very complicated situation because Syria is majority Sunni but they've been ruled by the allegedly secular Ba'ath party (Assad's party) but that party stays in power partly due to the Shia minority, specifically the Alawites, and they ruthlessly kill and imprison Sunni dissidents.
Furthermore, despite whatever Putin is saying about fighting ISIS, they simply are not. Their bombing/fighting has been mostly in northern Syria, near Aleppo. ISIS is not operating close to there, they are heavily concentrated in central/eastern Syria up to the border with Iraq. A no-fly zone would obviously be after negotiation with Russia. Russia itself would welcome a relaxing of economic sanctions imposed after its annexation of Crimea, so they would likely be willing to negotiate terms with the US on Syria. Russia's overall goal isn't necessarily to help Assad, it's to gain economic advantage in securing a pipeline for their oil, keeping their military bases in Syria and displaying their arms for export. Russia is broke and currently nobody really wants to buy their outdated shit.
On November 10 2016 19:08 Rapoza wrote:
So... is ww3 incoming?
Hillary Clinton is not a good candidate. Most of the charges against her are way overblown, many just complete fabrications, but its true she is simply not a good candidate. Still, you at least know what you're getting. Whatever she says, whatever her opponents say, her foreign policy will almost certainly be a continuation of Bill Clinton's or Obama's.
With Trump's foreign policy you have a mystery box. Its part mystery box because he has absolutely no experience, part because he's a pathological liar. Some people think nuclear weapons + mystery box is OK, as long as you can stick it to liberal political correctness. I do not, in fact I think its the furthest thing from OK.
this.
Also, the idea that Clinton would start WW3 because of the no fly zone position is just strategical counter to what the democrats were saying about Trump having the nuclear codes. I just can't believe that so many people repeat it like it's a plausible scenario. One can find a ton of careless (?) quotes of Trump in regards to nuclear weapons but nothing on behalf of Clinton that suggests she's a trigger happy WW3 enthusiast (links anyone?). Oh well I guess we'll see how the new president does
this statement about hacks treated like any military attack does seem way over the top wtf
Baal do you think that Russia isn't really behind the email hack though? I mean, is there some sort of conspiracy with the 17 intelligence agencies she mentions in the debate? Because, to be fair, the Russians directly influencing the election results isn't a simple "hack" too
Of course I'd rather the US didn't go to war over it obv
On November 09 2016 06:27 RiKD wrote:
I want more Wikileaks. Stronger bullshit police. Justice. Truth. Fuck the 1%.
Wikileaks supported Trump or to be more precise hated Hillary way more, in fact their hack with the emails might have been enough to sway the election, so maybe a hacker changed the course of history... interesting.
That was what I feared the most. The thing is, soon after I watched the recent interview with Assange, and he was so damn confident that Trump couldn't possibly win regardless. I figured if someone would know the outcome of this election in advance, he did. This is what shocked me the most last night.
link to interview?
ahh here Assange claims the Russians had nothing to do with the emails
gd that's an interesting interview
new shit has come to light... a-and... shit! man...
On November 09 2016 22:05 LikeASet wrote:
I believe most people's reasons for voting either are probably shallow.
...The election results are making me feel warm inside because I live in California and I'm surrounded by retarded social justice warrior millennials, many of them coming from schools like Berkely, Davis, etc. ...
...Anyways I feel like Trump getting elected is a big FU to social justice warrior culture and an "everyone stop being such pussies" kind of statement...
Idk bud, you might be the shallow one based on this post.
Millennials complaining about other SJW millennials reminds me of how people used to bash "emo kids" back in the day. Great for you man, I hope you found the validation you needed. Meanwhile there are people legitimately concerned for the environment, national surveillance, the supreme court justice seats, and a billion other things. Just people being shallow, I guess.
(For what it's worth I voted for neither HRC or Trump)
I really hoped Trump wouldn't win, but he did and we must respect the office. The election results are a real lesson in empathy. The writing was on the wall during the primaries, Trump had a snowballing, diehard fanbase and the rational left believed people would actually care about stuff like blatant sexual harassment. Fact of the matter is people are willing to look past it when their jobs, livelihood, and identity are on the line.
How the left feels now is exactly how racist nutjobs felt when we elected Obama in 08 - talk about secession, emigration, murder, etc. None of that happened, instead they came out in droves on election day. In 4 years, the left can respond similarly.
So by your logic, everyone who voted for trump is not concerned with the environment, national defence, etc. GJ oversimplifying the whole situation. Not like Hillary is a proven war monger or anything.
What the fuck are you talking about? You voted for a climate change denier. You're concerned with the environment how, exactly? I'm sure you're also concerned with women's rights as you also voted to take away their right to have an abortion. The list of stupid shit goes on, as we all know. Why? Because you felt "annoyed with some SJW people"? That's the equivalent of hiring a psychopath to shoot up a school because you were bullied by a small group of people and then patting yourself on the back for "winning".
The most disturbing part is how satisfied you are with yourself. No one with a functioning brain and a little compassion should be satisfied about [the results of] this election.
Ok I can't believe I have to explain this to you. So when somebody votes for said person, that means that said voter agrees with the candidates stance on ALL 100% OF THE ISSUES?
Stop thinking like a fkn child and trying to character assassinate me on a personal level. I never stated the specific reasons why I voted, and that I'm happy that all of Trumps desires are going to come true. People like you are adding to the problem, you're putting words in peoples mouths and putting everyone else in boxes. This is one of the reasons why the U.S. is so divided right now.
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Nov 11 2016 18:47. Posts 2233
On November 09 2016 06:27 RiKD wrote:
I want more Wikileaks. Stronger bullshit police. Justice. Truth. Fuck the 1%.
Wikileaks supported Trump or to be more precise hated Hillary way more, in fact their hack with the emails might have been enough to sway the election, so maybe a hacker changed the course of history... interesting.
That was what I feared the most. The thing is, soon after I watched the recent interview with Assange, and he was so damn confident that Trump couldn't possibly win regardless. I figured if someone would know the outcome of this election in advance, he did. This is what shocked me the most last night.
And last, what the fck are you americans doing still keeping that election system. " Democracy " when literally the majority of voters will not be represented properly because the system fails to deliver. I see so many dumb fucking posts about changing the status quo and nobody even thinks about the very foundation of that. Trump may not be the president you want or need, but he s definitely the one you deserve
are you talking about the electoral college?
Yes, electoral college might not even be that bad of an idea. Winner takes all on state level is idiotic though. Oh look 50.1% to 49.9% lets give the 50.1% all the votes.... because fuck logic.
The logic is that the country is a confederation of different states... what kind of electoral college do you want? One where only delegates are winner-take all?
No, one where everything is given proportionally to the votes received. No other thing makes sense if you truelly want democracy.
Why did you say an electoral college might not be a bad idea, then?
Its not that bad of an idea in the sense of easining up the elections themselves. Winner takes all policy on them however is quite bad. I have a question regarding them, are they legally bound to vote as the citizen have voted? Or can they just all pick Gary Johnson now, for example.
so you want an electoral college where everything is proportional
for example, we could have a hypothetical country with 3 states of 10 electors. two states vote pink at 56% each, so pink gets 12 electors. in the third state pink gets 36%, so 4 electors. that means pink wins with 16 electors. if each state had 10m voters, that would mean pink won 14.8m out of 30m and won with 16 electors.
why? why do you want this but winner take all is unfathomable? this doesn't do anything but introduce rounding errors into muh popular vote, muh democracy. winner take all has at least a principle behind it, whether it's at the state level or the delegate level. this has no principle except as you said "easining" (asinine) up the election.
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
1
traxamillion United States. Nov 11 2016 19:22. Posts 10468
Usa is a republic not a democracy thus the electorate. The idea is margin of winning in any one state doesnt really matter. Otherwise big states like california decide the election everytime. Campaign strats would look completely different
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Nov 11 2016 20:08. Posts 2233
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
The problem with that quote is he's obviously constructing a strawman. Liberals as a whole aren't saying those things (don't find me a tweet because when you're talking about a group of people as large as 55m+, there's bound to be morons, obviously). The real fear is that he ran a campaign where he attributed negative characteristics to whole groups of people, and even if he didn't mean to cast aspersions on the entire group, words are powerful and I'll give Trump credit here in that he speaks them very convincingly and his worst supporters will take his dog whistles and interpret them to suit their own hateful ideas.
People of color, Muslim-Americans, immigrants and even people who look like immigrants (because, how the hell can you tell the difference between a Mexican and a Mexican-American?) are being harassed at a higher rate than before this election season. Sure, Trump did not create the hate, but he stoked the flames and normalized it. Bigots, who previously would only say horrible shit among themselves are now emboldened to harass people openly in public because they believe the president-elect agrees with their hate, even if he truly doesn't. He played to his supporters darkest fears that immigrants are here to take jobs, commit rape, commit terrorism, and leech off society when none of those things are true, supported by lots of data. Immigrants tend to commit the least amount of crime because they're overjoyed to have a job and make some money and they don't want to risk the opportunity.
1
K40Cheddar United States. Nov 12 2016 01:58. Posts 2202
Fuck man I wish I got in this thread way sooner just saw it.
The fact that this man just won an election with the entire democratic party against him, his own republican party against him, the entire media grilling him daily and ignoring every single flaw in Clinton, the fact he spend almost 1/3 the amount as Clinton and isn't gifted wall street "donations" to the most corrupt candidate of all time, and STILL won this election tells you an immense amount about where the United States is at a whole.
The American people are fed up with the corrupt political system. They are tired of illegals slowly grinding away the nation (look at France). They are tired of the democrats sitting in their comfy chairs brainwashing the facebook/twitter crowd with their lies and bias.
You say Trump incites racism? What about the media classification set up by the democrats? Look at one mainstream news media station for the day and count the number of times you are going to see people referred to as "muslim", "latino", or "black". For every 25 white dudes getting arrests or shot by a cop that the media doesn't give a flying fuck about, they report the 1 black guy and send that shit to your news feed and tv so you can say "Oh man there is so much racism these days. Fuck the police." The media has turned completely to the left and is brainwashing everyone in their path to follow suit.
You compare the policies it's not even close. Hillary would have continued down the destructive path that Obama had layed out before her. People think the world is bad now, how about we let in millions more illegals and increase muslim immigration by 550%. That'll help everything. Obamacare is an absolute disaster and is hurting all parties (and I'm a mathematican that works in insurance looking at this stuff). Let's put up a fly zone around syria and start WWIII with Russian. Great idea. For all the issues that actually matter, I see no advantage in Hillary (maybe climate change but that's one of the lowest on my priority list). But you know letting those LGBT people be comfortable with the ability to use both bathrooms is cool too and way more important.
I'm really sorry Trump "offended" you. Yeah he's a "sexual offender" cause all those material grabbing women couldn't help but jump on his rich ass cock. You'd do the same fucking thing if you were a rich playboy too also you motherfucker. He's "racist" cause the media took it's dick and jammed it down your throat with his worst moments. How about you fucking go and crawl back into your safe space so you can cry like a little bitch. Grow up and educate yourself you hard left liberal motherfuckers. School being called off because people need to "recover" from the hardship of this election. Did people need to "recover" when Mitt Romney lost to Obama. Did people need to "recover" in any election in the past 200+ years of United States history? Grow some fucking nuts. I heard someone on the news protest today saying Trump getting elected is worse than the holocaust. Yeah man that's worse than millions of Jews getting slaughtered no question. Does the left really believe this dog shit? Better have to fucking die for this cause (see below).
What this election showed you is that the American people, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, not the crackjob liberals, not the corrupt political system, not the nut hugging media, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE have decided what's right for this county. And through Trump, the AMERICAN PEOPLE have spoken. It's time to make America great again.
(This post was induced in brief rage and immediate reaction. Arguments are limited and impulsive. I would be more than happy to have a rational, logical discussion regarding this going forward.)
GG
Last edit: 12/11/2016 02:03
1
K40Cheddar United States. Nov 12 2016 02:00. Posts 2202
Bonus liberal retardedness. Starts around 00:20 stops like 2:20. This is the shit that is the real problem with America that the media is implementing it's grain into. You can watch more where some bitch says "he doesn't represent our country". Oh really??? Apparently a good 60,000,000 people disagree
David Malpass, the former chief economist at Bear Stearns, the Wall Street investment bank that collapsed during the 2008 financial crisis, is overseeing the “economic issues” portfolio of the transition, as well as operations at the Treasury Department. Mr. Malpass now runs a firm called Encima Global, which sells economic research to institutional investors and corporate clients.
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
for all the people talking about Syria I strongly recommend watching this interview with Jack Murphy, U.S. special forces in Iraq who actually knows some things about the conflict.
tl;dw:
- FSA and 'moderate rebels' are a front to fence arms to Al-Nusra, JaF, Jihadis for $
- U.S. troop morale is at an all time low, they tend to sympathize with minority groups that support Assad (certain Kurd factions, Assyrians, Syrian Armenians, Yezidi etc). They tend to feel that they are training jihadis, esp the special forces guy who speak Arabic and actually have a clue. There's been numerous incidents like this where retarded 'U.S. backed moderate rebels' refer to the very soldiers training them as pigs and crusaders.
- Most think it's a result of bureaucratic incompetence and optimism to a fault on part of the CIA rather than some evil long-con plan to arm Nusra/ISIS
- Calls out a few journalists by name for putting out lobby group propaganda pushing for war
Contact Users: 1100 Active, 0 Logged in - Time: 08:52
United States. Nov 11 2016 10:45. Posts 2039
