This post is deleted!
Indecision 2016 - In Soviet Russia, we elect american president!
-
This post is deleted!
-
Texas, a swing state? http://thedailybanter.com/2016/10/texas-swing-state/
I've been seeing that but I just find it impossible to believe. In another couple elections sure, but not this year. It always goes Republican by over a million votes, like 60-40.
If its within even spitting distance Trump has been more Trumpy than we could have imagined.
-
Two reasons Trump has put Texas close to in play:
He's not doing well (relatively) in the South.
Texas Latinos lean more Republican than others in places like California or Florida. He's alienated them more than previous Republican candidates.
-
It's happening! LOL:
P.S. - It's not really an "LOL" matter, it's actually incredibly messed up and sick. More on this story will be released throughout the week.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
The whole concept of "make America great again" is really bigoted now that I think about it. The implication is that x group has ruined America and y group needs to fix it.
I've heard similar things from far-left fringe groups claiming that we need to make the world great again, because white people ruined it.
The Muslims ruined America, and the Whites need to fix it basically. One old, rich White man to be specific. (Actually…as weird as it sounds...it seems more that it's about Mexicans).
It's similar to Nazi speak and how they blamed A LOT of the woes of Germany on the Jews.
-
Its the basic reason right-wing populism will always be scarier than left-wing populism, even if they're both horribly destructive things.
Right-wing populism inevitably starts drawing lines around the population and defining out-groups who are not welcome anymore.–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Guys, I'm doing this on the fly. Not picking up only the articles that 100% underline my opinion. My one point (where I meant the guy had a point) was the "sabre-rattling".
Who is sable-rattling? Which country is the one aggressively buzzing others with their planes and submarines. Buzzing even harmless non-NATO places like Sweden for fucks sake.
The civilians are dying left and right anyway, dude.
Yeah, it fucking sucks that a ruler shoots at his own people. It sucks even more though when you prolong a war where you missed your chances to have a meaningful intervention. So much for red lines.What precisely makes you think a no-fly zone alone would have meant the end of the war? When the no-fly zone plus support strikes didn't? Did you think Gaddafi was willing to negotiate with the rebel forces? A guy who stupidly stuck around central Libya in the midst of war and ended up pulled out of a gutter and killed by teenage militia men?
This is the profile of a person who negotiates his own exit because he can't fly planes anymore?Oh and about the Kurds. You know they are being used as pawns by the US, who balances out their support with the Turks wanting them all dead and bombing them on the other side? Don't talk about the Kurds when you don't know what's going on.
The Kurds were and would be fighting ISIS and so forth entirely irrelevant of the US helping them or not. That is not a pawn. A pawn does not move itself.
The US chose a side and faction in the chaos that it felt it could safely support without accidentally helping extremists (like Al-Nusra), and one that had a degree of coherence to it as well. The US wants to destroy ISIS, the has a faction it can help make that happened without having to put its own troops on the ground.
Is the US motivated by love for the Kurdish nationalist cause? No. Is it manipulating soulless mercenaries with no self-motivation? No.Turkey is a junior version of Russia in terms of being an authoritarian former glory obsessed unstable actor in these things. Increasingly so in the past years. I'm not sure why you think mentioning that the US is juggling allies is some sort of point.
Tell me, what's the difference in civilian casualties in Aleppo (attacked by Assad and the Russian) and the ones in Mosul (attacked by Iraq and the US)? Please, tell me.
Did you really just finish lecturing RagrizX on "not knowing what's going on", and then make a post comparing an ongoing siege with one that hasn't started yet? Because Mosul hasn't been put under siege yet. Wait a week then you can try and make this point. But boy howdy is it a doomed one.
I'm not defending anyone. I just want people to stop having double-standards and start recognizing what's going on. The Russians are killing people, the Americans are too. It's a freaking war, so it happens, right? (and yes, I know Russians hit hospitals. I bet it never ever happened to American fighters though…)
America accidentally hits a hospital in Afghanistan and it becomes a big scandalous news with people rushing around making apologies and investigations.
Russia is and keeps blowing up hospitals in Aleppo and bomb UN aid convoys quite deliberately and throws up smokescreens and shrugs in response.But why am I even arguing because you don't give a fuck. "It's a freaking war, so it happens."
As to the first: No, you're wrong here. I'm merely looking at the system and telling you what I see - or at least how I see it. And maybe I'm expressing myself wrongly sometimes, but between a person who tells people to look at both sides and a guy who see only the other guy as the culprit, I think I'm closer to the truth.
This is the official "stupid ass thing people believe these days that sounds smart".
Actually no! Picking a completely central position in any given scenario does not make any sense whatsoever! In the real world there are actually, even frequently, non balanced scenarios! There is no magical rule of nature that means all things are balanced in guilt and impact!
Detective DemonX arrives on the scene of a car accident where a drunk driver has plowed through school kids waiting for their bus.
"Well I mean, I know what this looks like, but have we considered if these kids were to blame in part? I think I'm closer to the the truth."
Logical approach, just taking a neutral middle-ground entirely unrelated to context.In related questioning, did they dub or sub South Park when it came to Germany?
That being said, to clarify again: I'm from Germany. And I like the Western sphere of influence and wouldn't trade it in for any other.
Yes. You're from Germany. And you don't have to trade it for any other or even worry about the possibility.
And gosh, if that other country is going to act out let's let them so we can keep enjoying the absolute stability of our cushy bubbles. Sorry Ukraine! Fuck you got mine!The States are a state. The most powerful state around at the moment. They will act in their own interest (and that of their allies). Just like the Russians. That's what people have to know first and foremost.
As a citizen of that state, fuck my country for what it did to Latin America in the name of our own interest in the Cold War.
And fuck my country if it does any of that again anywhere.Oh and reminder again, I don't actually think you believe in Realpolitick, not until it allowed you to rationalize Russian actions as "actually not bad".
-
I've been seeing that but I just find it impossible to believe. In another couple elections sure, but not this year. It always goes Republican by over a million votes, like 60-40.
If its within even spitting distance Trump has been more Trumpy than we could have imagined.
well I did just hear that Texans are breaking early voting records across the state
-
Texas, a swing state? http://thedailybanter.com/2016/10/texas-swing-state/
Wow, that is awesome! Looks like Hillary will really get a landslide in this election! -hoping she does-
-
well I did just hear that Texans are breaking early voting records across the state
Well, I had to long distance vote this time around…
Shame its still screwed on the local level though. However anti-Trump the state may be, its still going to be super pro-republican everywhere else. (I'm sorry Wendy Davis, we failed you.)
By 2020 I could have hoped for it being lightly purple, and 2024 at the earliest ready for a fight. That it could be this soon,even if only for this one particular election, is just insane beyond reason.
Once Texas goes and stays blue (and it WILL eventually) then the republican party as-is can't ever win a presidential election again.
-
A blue Texas on Nov 8th would be the most glorious thing in the world.
-
Even a "too close to call" for a while or until the next morning would be pretty good.
Or most dramatically best, called for Republican by some outlets, but then as more votes come in they have to rescind that.
-
@Monkey:
Its the basic reason right-wing populism will always be scarier than left-wing populism, even if they're both horribly destructive things.
Right-wing populism inevitably starts drawing lines around the population and defining out-groups who are not welcome anymore.Yeah that is more or less true.
The fringe left usually sticks to beating people up over views, while the right fringe usually beats people up over race.
-
Most poll aggregator still have Trump as the overwhelming favorite in Texas so seems unlikely. Arizona and Georgia on the other hand look a lot more likely to flip blue( especially Arizona)
-
Most poll aggregator still have Trump as the overwhelming favorite so seems unlikely. Arizona and Georgia on the other hand look a lot more likely to flip blue( especially Arizona)
The factor beyond just polls is voter turnout. Which is a huge part of running an election campaign.
This requires two main things:1. A strong "ground game" which means a really large and well funded system of campaign that reaches out down to straight up calling registered voters of your party to remind them to vote and pump them up. Hillary has a really good system of this, loads of cash. Trump does not, like….historically does not (because his campaign is an amateur mess).
2. Not depressing voter turnout in your party by running around like an asshole telling people their votes will be wasted by nonexistent rigging. While simultaneously ratcheting up your alienating of people who are willing to vote for their party even if they hate the candidate. Push them too much and they won't even do that.
-
Texas, Georgia, and the Carolinas flip blue. The Monkey's Paw that Strom Thurmond was buried with curls into a fist.
-
I think I figured out who Prince's death is destroying. It's not a person exactly. Like with Bowie and Scalia.
Prince's death is going to correspond to the death of the Republican party.
-
The Millennial electoral results:
-
@The:
It's similar to Nazi speak and how they blamed A LOT of the woes of Germany on the Jews.
In that case foreigners did have a hand in the immediate post-ww1 ruination of Germany, but Nazis blamed local Jews for it.
-
@Monkey:
1. A strong "ground game" which means a really large and well funded system of campaign that reaches out down to straight up calling registered voters of your party to remind them to vote and pump them up. Hillary has a really good system of this, loads of cash. Trump does not, like….historically does not (because his campaign is an amateur mess).
Is she campaigning hard in Texas though? Considering she's a careful and methodic person, I think she wouldn't want to take such a risk and focus on the states she has a higher chance
-
Ugh, because of one story where someone thought a machine switched their vote, people I know are starting to assume a conspiracy and think that all these machines are rigged for Hillary. If there's anything that gets me, it's the assumption that only the horrible Democrats would do this, and those saintly Republicans would never try something like this.
While the election may be ending soon, It will be some time before all this idiocy dies down.
-
Yeah that is more or less true.
The fringe left usually sticks to beating people up over views, while the right fringe usually beats people up over race.
Well shit .
-
Is she campaigning hard in Texas though? Considering she's a careful and methodic person, I think she wouldn't want to take such a risk and focus on the states she has a higher chance
Campaigning and putting pressure into teetering red states doesn't have to make you win it, if it makes your enemy have to double down to defend what should be safe territory for them. Distracting them from genuine swing states they should be putting resources into.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@Monkey:
I think I figured out who Prince's death is destroying. It's not a person exactly. Like with Bowie and Scalia.
Prince's death is going to correspond to the death of the Republican party.
Death: The time has come. However due to your immense contributions to the music world you are being given one last wish before you perish.
Prince: And what sort of wish is that?
Death: A dark one, you may select someone or something. You will die, and then sometime in the next year they will follow.
Prince: Some…thing?
Death: Yes.
Prince: I wish...
.......
.....
-
Well shit .
Yeah i guess it was a little of a well duh moment.
Was just thinking about most reported cases i can remember and how they played out along those lines.
-
@Monkey:
Who is sable-rattling? Which country is the one aggressively buzzing others with their planes and submarines. Buzzing even harmless non-NATO places like Sweden for fucks sake.
In this case, I mean the often one-sided view the media have on Russian-related things, making them seem evil incarnate and always at fault.
I never defended their show of force. Though they can of course be explained (again, not defended) by all those missile-defenses put in Eastern Europe and such things.What precisely makes you think a no-fly zone alone would have meant the end of the war? When the no-fly zone plus support strikes didn't? Did you think Gaddafi was willing to negotiate with the rebel forces? A guy who stupidly stuck around central Libya in the midst of war and ended up pulled out of a gutter and killed by teenage militia men?
This is the profile of a person who negotiates his own exit because he can't fly planes anymore?Maybe you mistook this discussion for the other in the Random News Thread, but this here was about Syria, not Lybia. On Lybia, I responded in the other thread.
As for Syria, a no-fly zone and an actual intervention would have probably prevented Putin from entering the theater. Though I do not know if that course of action would have ultimately been better.The Kurds were and would be fighting ISIS and so forth entirely irrelevant of the US helping them or not. That is not a pawn. A pawn does not move itself.
The US chose a side and faction in the chaos that it felt it could safely support without accidentally helping extremists (like Al-Nusra), and one that had a degree of coherence to it as well. The US wants to destroy ISIS, the has a faction it can help make that happened without having to put its own troops on the ground.
Is the US motivated by love for the Kurdish nationalist cause? No. Is it manipulating soulless mercenaries with no self-motivation? No.Hey, it's not me who was deploring their role in this war. Yes, you are right, they would've been fighting regardless of US support. But can't you see where things can go wrong again, with all the sectarian issues in Iraq, especially when it comes to Kurds and Turkey? At the end of the war, you will have heavily armed Kurds in the northern areas again, who will want autonomy in any case. I really hope that won't become another big issue.
Turkey is a junior version of Russia in terms of being an authoritarian former glory obsessed unstable actor in these things. Increasingly so in the past years. I'm not sure why you think mentioning that the US is juggling allies is some sort of point.
Uhm…because they're an ally, part of NATO and have possibly helped funding ISIS at the beginning in order (at least in part, I assume) to counter-act the Kurds?
Did you really just finish lecturing RagrizX on "not knowing what's going on", and then make a post comparing an ongoing siege with one that hasn't started yet? Because Mosul hasn't been put under siege yet. Wait a week then you can try and make this point. But boy howdy is it a doomed one.
Ah, my bad. They've only started encircling it and are still a few kilometres out, though they've been through a few towns and villages. Don't think that's a doomed argument though.
America accidentally hits a hospital in Afghanistan and it becomes a big scandalous news with people rushing around making apologies and investigations.
Russia is and keeps blowing up hospitals in Aleppo and bomb UN aid convoys quite deliberately and throws up smokescreens and shrugs in response.But why am I even arguing because you don't give a fuck. "It's a freaking war, so it happens."
You're really not seeing the point here. First of all, the US sees itself as a force of freedom and democracy. It purports itself to act according to its laws and other accords it might have signed. That's a big problem when it comes to collateral damage.
Russia, on the other hand, doesn't fucking care. They have their propaganda, deflect investigations and say human rights are an idea invented by the West (not sure if they really said it, or maybe it was China?).
So yeah, war is war. There will be casualties, humans will die. The problem, in this case, was how it was going to be portrayed by the media. The attack on Mosul will invariably also end lots of innocent human lives, even if the invading forces will try their utmost NOT to hit any hospitals. I just don't like such operations being sugar coated because they're being led by the West, as if innocent people will be happy to die…(I'm exaggerating here a bit, but you get my point, I hope).
This is the official "stupid ass thing people believe these days that sounds smart".
Actually no! Picking a completely central position in any given scenario does not make any sense whatsoever! In the real world there are actually, even frequently, non balanced scenarios! There is no magical rule of nature that means all things are balanced in guilt and impact!
Detective DemonX arrives on the scene of a car accident where a drunk driver has plowed through school kids waiting for their bus.
"Well I mean, I know what this looks like, but have we considered if these kids were to blame in part? I think I'm closer to the the truth."
Logical approach, just taking a neutral middle-ground entirely unrelated to context.In related questioning, did they dub or sub South Park when it came to Germany?
Again, look at what I wrote in the other thread. Your analogy isn't appropriate in this case. Things can be explained according to certain actions. They aren't a defense or a constructed reality. How is it the middle ground if I'm saying Russia is threatened by our missile-defensive systems in Romania no matter how much we will repeat they're there for Iran. You not comprehending how Putin can possible think we'd start a war and saying it's his program or whatever doesn't change the idea that they will take action, like having more battalions right at the borders.
Yes, they did, I think. Been a while since I've watched it, even longer since I've watched it on German TV.
Yes. You're from Germany. And you don't have to trade it for any other or even worry about the possibility.
And gosh, if that other country is going to act out let's let them so we can keep enjoying the absolute stability of our cushy bubbles. Sorry Ukraine! Fuck you got mine!I do agree and I'm grateful for where I am. Though I fucking hope the AfD starts losing votes and people come to their senses again. It's still quite concerning, with all these far-left/far-right parties in Europe gaining momentum, especially because of the refugees.
I never said I personally feel like that. I'm just aware (like everyone at the moment) it doesn't work like that. I'd gladly welcome Ukraine to the EU when they're ready, but is the US ready to go to war with Russia for them? No? Yeah, thought so. Neither is Germany or other states of the EU, apparently.
As a citizen of that state, fuck my country for what it did to Latin America in the name of our own interest in the Cold War.
And fuck my country if it does any of that again anywhere.Totally my sentiment. But short of erasing the whole system as we know it and reforming/evolving as humanity, such things will continue to happen.
Oh and reminder again, I don't actually think you believe in Realpolitick, not until it allowed you to rationalize Russian actions as "actually not bad".
Oh, I do acknowledge it when looking at certain states' actions. There are many theories in International Relations, but not one can entirely explain a state's or the international system's actions.
Realpolitik is also why the US wants to maintain a bigger presence in Asia, so as to counteract China. And in many of its (and other states') past actions, too.
Again, I really think you have (or had) a false image of me. Hopefully you understood more about how I'm think on the issue from this and the other post.
-
Mailed my absentee California ballot in yesterday, voted for Clinton of course.
As a 24 year old in the United States Navy, this is the first presidential election I participated in, and I'm proud of voting, even if no one else in my family does.
-
The fringe left usually sticks to beating people up over views, while the right fringe usually beats people up over race.
The real difference between the fringe left and the fringe right in the US is that the fringe left badmouths everybody but never actually organizes and accomplishes nothing as a result while the fringe right actually does do some damage since they get out and vote.
Because of that lack of organization, nobody takes the fringe left seriously while the fringe right has ran the Republican Party outright since 2010.
-
@Monkey:
I think I figured out who Prince's death is destroying. It's not a person exactly. Like with Bowie and Scalia.
Prince's death is going to correspond to the death of the Republican party.
They stand in the way of love, and we will smoke them all with their intellect and a savior-faire. No one in the whole universe will ever compare!
-
The real difference between the fringe left and the fringe right in the US is that the fringe left badmouths everybody but never actually organizes and accomplishes nothing as a result while the fringe right actually does do some damage since they get out and vote.
Because of that lack of organization, nobody takes the fringe left seriously while the fringe right has ran the Republican Party outright since 2010.
Also, the fringe right is less likely to split apart due to personality conflicts, unlike the thousands of Socialist parties this country has who only differ in what kind of socks they wear.
-
@Cyan:
Also, the fringe right is less likely to split apart due to personality conflicts, unlike the thousands of Socialist parties this country has who only differ in what kind of socks they wear.
-
-
I always knew Fox News was biased liberally
-
@The:
Ugh, because of one story where someone thought a machine switched their vote, people I know are starting to assume a conspiracy and think that all these machines are rigged for Hillary. If there's anything that gets me, it's the assumption that only the horrible Democrats would do this, and those saintly Republicans would never try something like this.
While the election may be ending soon, It will be some time before all this idiocy dies down.
This happened to me during the California primary. I just asked the poll person if they could go back to the beginning so I can correctly vote for who I wanted and it took less that 30 seconds.
Hell the lady this happened to didn't say it was rigged just for people to double check before they submit their vote.
-
Trump was in tv hit dinosaurs
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
that's so creepy lol
-
That's the best thing I ever watched about this election.
-
The real difference between the fringe left and the fringe right in the US is that the fringe left badmouths everybody but never actually organizes and accomplishes nothing as a result while the fringe right actually does do some damage since they get out and vote.
Because of that lack of organization, nobody takes the fringe left seriously while the fringe right has ran the Republican Party outright since 2010.
Back home the autonomous left usually just keep to vandalizing houses and offices of political parties and their members, maybe some violent intimidation at times. Though they do stab or beat up political opponents from time to time. But they number roughly in the hundreds so it's not like it's a huge group.
The same is pretty much true of the motherland defenders of any denomination. Though they mostly just stock up on arms and pray for a race war or something. Given enough of a pretense they might go out and viciously beat some Moroccan street child, y'know to protect the cowered Swedes or something equally pretentious like that. Expect long speeches about Sionism plotting the end to the western world. Also not a very numerous grouping.
-
Bill Weld says that this election is not the time to be voting for a third party; Trump is too dangerous for that.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bill-weld-tells-voters-pick-clinton-over-trump
-
Bill Weld says that this election is not the time to be voting for a third party; Trump is too dangerous for that.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bill-weld-tells-voters-pick-clinton-over-trump
The whipping by the Free Minds of the Libertarian Hivemind shall be brutal but the penance on his soul shall grant him peace.
-
Speaking of vandalism.
I drove by this today. A news van and some cop cars were out still even though it had been a couple of hours.
I'm feeling mixed feelings about this. It's like so cathartic but also bad cause I don't condone destruction of property in public spaces.
It's like that video of that guy who round house kicked out a truck window for the guy in the truck calling him the n-word. It's not like the person was innocent but also it's a bad idea to destroy property…
-
@mario:
Trump was in tv hit dinosaurs
http://i.imgur.com/w8QNm9O.gif–- Update From New Post Merge ---
that's so creepy lol
I gotta say: The people who made Dinosaurs were godlike with the puppetry and movement of their characters. Like, just look at the eyes going from wide open to an angry squint.
-
A Henson show with a budget was a wondrous thing indeed.
Still though, that comparison is unfair to B.P. Richfield, who was a lot better businessman than Trump.
-
So did Gary Johnson actually drop out of the race or was that false information? Seems odd to do that now while people have been able to vote already.
-
A Henson show with a budget was a wondrous thing indeed.
Still though, that comparison is unfair to B.P. Richfield, who was a lot better businessman than Trump.
Not to mention his views aren't quite as prehistoric.
-
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/more-republicans-expect-clinton-to-win-us-election-than-trump-poll/
Dat derp spiral.
Saw a similar article on Reuters earlier. Granted, "more" means 41% to 40% but it's a huge drop from last month where close to 60% of Republicans were expecting Trump to win.
-
-
In this case, I mean the often one-sided view the media have on Russian-related things, making them seem evil incarnate and always at fault.
I never defended their show of force. Though they can of course be explained (again, not defended) by all those missile-defenses put in Eastern Europe and such things.What missile defenses? And if and when you find some, tell me when they became active. I wonder if the date will be after early 2014?? Wonder what happened then!
Also as an American I'm already sick as shit of our Republicans whining about vague media bias without actually engaging with the apparent unfair specifics.Maybe you mistook this discussion for the other in the Random News Thread, but this here was about Syria, not Lybia. On Lybia, I responded in the other thread.
As for Syria, a no-fly zone and an actual intervention would have probably prevented Putin from entering the theater. Though I do not know if that course of action would have ultimately been better.The no-fly zone would have been against Assad. Whom Putin is heavily investing Russian blood and treasure in saving.
Heck the most basic glance at Syria should tell you Russia's investment has nothing whatsoever to do with peacekeeping between two factions as you're suggesting.Yes, you are right, they would've been fighting regardless of US support. But can't you see where things can go wrong again, with all the sectarian issues in Iraq, especially when it comes to Kurds and Turkey?
"Sectarian" refers to religious divides. The Kurds stand apart from the sectarian conflict even while being overwhelmingly Sunni. Also the Kurdish forces in Syria and the ones in Iraq are completely different groups with entirely different politics, alliances, and enemies (aside from ISIS).
The Iraqi Kurds are most likely to engage in inter-ethnic violence, but they're also actually on good terms with Turkey.
The Syrian Kurds have been very inclusive of non-Kurds, but they are the ones who are on terrible terms with Turkey.
Turkey isn't actually anti-Kurd so much as they are anti-PKK. The Syrian Kurds have connections with the PKK, the Iraqi Kurds do not.I also see on top of all this, that ISIS is unquestionably worse than such possibilities. Its not impossible some genocidal actions might happened after ISIS is destroyed from the Kurds vs Arabs. But genocidal actions have ALREADY been taking place from ISIS lol.
Uhm…because they're an ally, part of NATO and have possibly helped funding ISIS at the beginning in order (at least in part, I assume) to counter-act the Kurds?
Yes? And?
At the end of the war, you will have heavily armed Kurds in the northern areas again, who will want autonomy in any case. I really hope that won't become another big issue.
Like I said. Turkey and the Iraqi Kurds are buddies. The Syrian ones are enemies with them true, but again you are asking me to pick between a good cause (the light form of Kurdish nationalism seen in Syria) and a piece of shit (Erdogan). And thinking that the piece of shit should be the one chosen I guess?
Ah, my bad. They've only started encircling it and are still a few kilometres out, though they've been through a few towns and villages. Don't think that's a doomed argument though.
Well yeah, technically RT will tell you your right when the time comes.
You're really not seeing the point here. First of all, the US sees itself as a force of freedom and democracy. It purports itself to act according to its laws and other accords it might have signed. That's a big problem when it comes to collateral damage.
Yes. It is. It is good we have standards that we grill each-other over. This is positive.
Russia of course also talks a line or twenty about standing for things. And purports to act according to international laws. And does not grill itself over this sort of thing at all.
I wonder which one is going to have a bigger pile of dead civilians from a siege.So yeah, war is war. There will be casualties, humans will die. The problem, in this case,
Is any country not holding itself to standards on this sort of thing.
was how it was going to be portrayed by the media.
The fuck?
The attack on Mosul will invariably also end lots of innocent human lives, even if the invading forces will try their utmost NOT to hit any hospitals. I just don't like such operations being sugar coated because they're being led by the West, as if innocent people will be happy to die…(I'm exaggerating here a bit, but you get my point, I hope).
Its almost as if the side trying not to murder civilians, will cause a lot lot lot less dead civilians then the one serial bombing hospitals and not giving a fuck. Me pointing that out is apparently sugarcoating.
How is it the middle ground if I'm saying Russia is threatened by our missile-defensive systems in Romania
Well for starters those missile defense systems were activated in 2016. Two years after Russia invaded Ukraine and annexed part of it while feeding an insurgency to this day. So your order of operations here is completely fucked.
This middle ground doesn't make any sense.no matter how much we will repeat they're there for Iran.
I don't think I've ever heard anyone claim Russia was in Syria to help Iran.
You not comprehending how Putin can possible think we'd start a war
Putin doesn't believe anyone is invading Russia, and none of his circle does.
Yes, they did, I think. Been a while since I've watched it, even longer since I've watched it on German TV.
I never said I personally feel like that. I'm just aware (like everyone at the moment) it doesn't work like that. I'd gladly welcome Ukraine to the EU when they're ready, but is the US ready to go to war with Russia for them? No? Yeah, thought so. Neither is Germany or other states of the EU, apparently.
And the ultimate conclusion of your logic is that literally nothing should be done, because anything done then becomes to blame for Russia's further shit behavior.
Sanctions? No don't! Russia might be scared!
Troop movements in NATO? No don't! Russia might be scared!
The EU negotiating with an independent nation on starting processes of integration? No don't! Russia might be scared!Almost as if the end goal of this narrative is Russia getting to do whatever, and the West doing nothing.
Do you see yet what the purpose of the bullshit RT and company create is?"Totally my sentiment. But short of erasing the whole system as we know it and reforming/evolving as humanity, such things will continue to happen."
Ah, I love convenient nihilism.
Realpolitik is also why the US wants to maintain a bigger presence in Asia, so as to counteract China. And in many of its (and other states') past actions, too.
China wouldn't require counteraction if it wasn't belligerent toward its southern neighbors.
-
GOP is already preparing congressional investigations and impeachment for president Hillary: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/hillary-clinton-s-victory-prize-congressional-investigations-n672926
-
So they can get President Kaine if she is impeached? I don't see what good opening investigations will do after the election.
-
So they can get President Kaine if she is impeached? I don't see what good opening investigations will do after the election.
You sir simply aren't a Republican grasping at straws.
-
Tim Kaine is white and has a penis. In the eyes of many Republicans that alone makes him superior to Hillary or Obama.
-
Tim Kaine is white and has a penis. In the eyes of many Republicans that alone makes him superior to Hillary or Obama.
Anthony Weiner should have moved to Florida and joined the GOP. Definitive proof he is white and has a penis, sex scandals involving underage girls. It's like we had a puzzle piece for the wrong puzzle.