wcw43921 Posted April 1, 2017 Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 George Takei To Run Against Devin Nunes In 2018 Iuz the Evil and aylwin13 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted April 1, 2017 Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 George Takei To Run Against Devin Nunes In 2018Tulare? Hmmmm. Well, good luck George. I would love to see it happen. Edit: aaaand it was an April Fools joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aylwin13 Posted April 1, 2017 Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 Tulare? Hmmmm. Well, good luck George. I would love to see it happen. Edit: aaaand it was an April Fools joke. And I so wish that our current government was too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted April 1, 2017 Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 I keep hoping I'm going to wake up from a bad dream. tkdguy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolgroth Posted April 1, 2017 Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 And I so wish that our current government was too. Oh it's a joke alright. Just one that fell flat and keeps going on despite that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted April 2, 2017 Report Share Posted April 2, 2017 Donald Trump, the Adam Sandler of politicians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted April 2, 2017 Report Share Posted April 2, 2017 Donald Trump, the Adam Sandler of politicians. In keeping with that theme this message seems appropriate for Mr. Trump: aylwin13 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaspar Hauser Posted April 3, 2017 Report Share Posted April 3, 2017 Speaking of post-truth tendencies, I think this quote speaks to a lot of we're hearing from the Alt Right: “Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.” ― Jean Paul-Sartre assault, Lord Liaden, DShomshak and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/06/politics/donald-trump-syria-military/index.html ...and here. We. Go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Are we even 100 days in? Man, I hate being right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 108 days I believe. He showed more restraint than I gave credit for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcw43921 Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 By my count it's been 77 days since the inauguration. Who was it that was saying Clinton was the warmonger? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 By my count it's been 77 days since the inauguration. Who was it that was saying Clinton was the warmonger? You are correct, the 100 day mark is late April. In my defense it seems like a lot longer... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Just 1,383 days to go! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sociotard Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 I was, and I stand by it. She has a well established history of hawkishness. She advised Obama to step into that Syrian quagmire early and more deeply, and I'm glad she was ignored. I am a fairly radical military isolationist. I want a foreign policy that actively avoids conflict, whenever possible. I had a tough choice this election, between a predictable hawk who had signs of being competent in her hawkishness, and an incompetent who swayed from extreme sabre rattling to isolationism with a frequency best reserved for gamma rays. I voted Clinton, but uneasily. I have fantasies about getting someone in office I can really get behind, but my countrymen are, frankly, so bloodthirsty I don't think I'll ever get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranxerox Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 I was, and I stand by it. She has a well established history of hawkishness. She advised Obama to step into that Syrian quagmire early and more deeply, and I'm glad she was ignored. I am a fairly radical military isolationist. I want a foreign policy that actively avoids conflict, whenever possible. I had a tough choice this election, between a predictable hawk who had signs of being competent in her hawkishness, and an incompetent who swayed from extreme sabre rattling to isolationism with a frequency best reserved for gamma rays. I voted Clinton, but uneasily. I have fantasies about getting someone in office I can really get behind, but my countrymen are, frankly, so bloodthirsty I don't think I'll ever get it. But would Assad have done this if Hilary had won? My theory is Assad figured they had "their man" in the White House and got cocky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Assad did this while Obama was president. Most American presidents have for decades been reluctant to insert American military units directly into the Middle Eastern quagmire. Given what happened to those who weren't reluctant, that's understandable. I imagine all the world's leaders are attempting to reevaluate what may occur under a Trump presidency. Including Vladimir Putin. Whether that's a good, bad or indifferent thing depends on what happens next. But I guarantee no one is taking anything for granted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Trump hasn't done much yet other than launch $100M worth of missiles at a deserted airbase. He even warned the Russians (and everyone else) there that they were coming. It's pretty weak as responses go. Now that he's "sent a message" I imagine we'll go back to ignoring Assad unless Trump needs another distraction. DasBroot 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Well, with Syria, I fear if we were to take out Assad, the biggest winner would be ISIS. Syria was one of the things I actually ended up being on Obama's side on (probably for totally different reasons but anyway). I don't see any good guys in this conflict (the few that were have long since died or fled**, in all likelihood). **Not counting civilians who are mainly concerned with survival DasBroot 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DasBroot Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Trump hasn't done much yet other than launch $100M worth of missiles at a deserted airbase. He even warned the Russians (and everyone else) there that they were coming. It's pretty weak as responses go. Now that he's "sent a message" I imagine we'll go back to ignoring Assad unless Trump needs another distraction. This is my read on it as well. It's step one of showing the world what he means by 'you're on notice' - he's not averse to military action. This isn't necessarily a bad thing - I understand the backlash against the 'World Police' image, but frankly I'm ok with it if it means saving innocent people. Always have been. Step two will determine how the people he's trying to impress/cow see it in the long run, though. It's largely a slap on the wrist, as far as military responses are concerned, and if it's the extent of the response then some aggressors will shrug and write it off as a cost of doing business. If it leads to a coalition forming that removes a dictator who has committed war crimes from power while (and this is very important, and a big part of why the conflict continues) NOT leaving a power vacuum for ISIS to fill then maybe, just maybe, someone else out there might think twice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ternaugh Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 The cynic in me says that it lets Trump have a military "victory" with very little effort, allows him to distance himself slightly from Russia, boosts his standing with certain vocal critics in Congress, and lets him imply that he's willing to use force against North Korea if provoked. It also distracted away from a jobs report which wasn't quite as good as expected, boosted oil prices on the world markets, and improved the stock value of the manufacturer of the missiles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hopcroft Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 If he is serious about wanting to involve the US in Syria, I do not see a good outcome. In fact, I don't think there is a conceivable good outcome. Certainly not for the people of Syria, who are really really bleeped with everything that has been going on. If this is a Wag the Dog moment, it comes a bit early. Which means that there will probably be other such moments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Let's all just hope that "Land War in Asia" isn't next on the agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hopcroft Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Let's all just hope that "Land War in Asia" isn't next on the agenda. It may not be "next", but the hawkish right has been urging "strong action" against North Korea for two decades now. The consequences of an airstrike against their nuclear facilities (assuming we can find them) do not look promising, and no sane person suggests an outright invasion (which means the administration is probably making a contingency plan for one as we speak). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sociotard Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Vox had an article about how impulsive this seems: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/4/7/15217492/trump-syria-foreign-policy The best bit was when they replayed his tweets from 2013, telling Obama to not meddle in Syria. And Obama did not meddle. Well, just a little. But less than what Donald just did. The only reason President Obama wants to attack Syria is to save face over his very dumb RED LINE statement. Do NOT attack Syria,fix U.S.A. What I am saying is stay out of Syria. AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.