might as well just give up then...
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
might as well just give up then...
I call bullshit on that. Its not even the same organization (PKK) . It was ethnic cleansing , simple as that.
The PKK and YPG are one and the same, and the YPG are the major force behind the SDF. This is a photo from downtown Raqqa after the US and SDF together liberated the city from ISIS:
Erdogan does have grander ambitions and agendas, but no Turkish leader would tolerate this, and ultimately no US President would abandon Ankara for the PKK. Many of us saw the betrayal of the Syrian Kurds coming even before Trump took office.
Don't think that's an accurate description of what happened. For example, this post is quite obviously not about military/foreign policy issues, but about Obama's and Trump's presidencies in a broader sense:
And here you explicitly dismiss concerns about the detoriation of inner-US political conditions as "heavily subjective", contrasting it with the supposedly more real & objective issues of foreign policy and war. Pretty much the focus I criticized as arbitrary:
That's the original context of the ensuing discussion. Hard not to see an underlying, more general stance in all of this.
Last edited:
So rather than accepting my description of my argument and moving on with the broader discussion, you'd rather continue to tell me what my argument is. Cool.
Specific acts of war are objectively measurable. The deterioration of inner-US political conditions may well be measurable - and I'd be keen to see what it is you'd use to measure that, as it's hardly a claim that stands on its own - but those measurements won't be objective.
Just because it's subjective doesn't mean it's less important, but you have to believe you've got a crystal clear understanding of the political world and its direct influences on society to think your understanding of the deterioration of inner-political conditions is anything more than an educated guess. The majority of people can only answer that question with limited knowledge and obvious bias. I definitely can't offer more than that.
Whereas the question of whether Trump went to war with North Korea will be answered in the same way by everyone you ask. And there were a few people that predicted that would've happened by now. That's a simple question to ask years on: what explained that gap between the prediction and reality. The kind of broader subjective questions you're asking will never be quite so simple because people just continuously reframe the question every time it's brought up, the goalposts get moved, nothing was ever defined in the first place, it's always just a vehicle for someone's largely fixed political views.
So it isn't that I dismissed them, but I didn't think they fit so easily into the conversation, and I don't afford the same kind of time you do for lengthy political conversations. I just said I was happy to pick it up later, primarily because I think your question requires a bit more thought than mine, and I didn't have time to think about it yet. And then again you fill in the blanks with your own assumptions.
Last edited:
I merely quoted your own posts, which I think make clear what the original context of the discussion was. We won't agree on this, so it's probably best to leave it alone and move on.
I don't even disagree with your standpoint on foreign policy in isolation btw(*), and I have argued similarly in the past. As for speculations, there's a heavy dose of speculation in all talks about politics and society. I don't think a sharp distinction between seemingly "objective" and "subjective" arguments is useful, or even possible. An objective fact becomes subjective as soon as interpretation enters the field. It's about making plausible cases, while keeping in mind that one might be on the wrong track.
(*) Edit: except for the (apparent) level of confidence in the institutions to reliably prevent catastrophic escalations in the future as well
Last edited:
Funny how it was tolerated before Trump? Also, is the SDF now a terrorist organisation according to the US , after all it is that to their ally Turkey , right ? It's not, because it doesn't matter who Turkey considers terrorist. They also do so for Gullen, why is he not extradited, after all such great allies the US and Turkey are...They got axed from the f35 program as well.The PKK and YPG are one and the same, and the YPG are the major force behind the SDF. This is a photo from downtown Raqqa after the US and SDF together liberated the city from ISIS:
Erdogan does have grander ambitions and agendas, but no Turkish leader would tolerate this, and ultimately no US President would abandon Ankara for the PKK. Many of us saw the betrayal of the Syrian Kurds coming even before Trump took office.
Geopolitics is complicated, and sometimes not each and everyone of your partners have aligned interests. Its simpleton such as Trump that view things in black and white.
It was tolerated for over two years under Trump as well, because the focus was on defeating ISIS, and the Obama administration had chosen to partner with the SDF in order to achieve that. Trump continued with Obama’s policy until ISIS was considered defeated, and then, surprise surprise, the SDF were dropped.
The US and Turkey are rather uneasy allies lately, and one of the reasons has been US support for the SDF, which has helped push Turkey into the arms of Putin (which in turn led to the controversy over the F35 program), when on paper Moscow and Ankara’s conflicting agendas in Syria and elsewhere should by all rights have pushed Turkey closer to the Americans. Again, any US President would have sought to improve relations after ISIS, and the SDF were always expendable (and Gulen may prove so too). Turkey remains a NATO member, and the US maintains crucial military infrastructure there. Erdogan will be gone one day, but the US will still have to deal with Turkey as an ally, as they have for over seven decades now.
CNN are now at it.
CNN's Moment Of Clarity: "Bernie Has A Realistic Shot"
CNN's Moment Of Clarity: "Bernie Has A Realistic Shot"
Account has been nuked
What did it say?
You'd have to ask @berbatrick - I never saw it before it was taken down.
It should be, SDF is the 2nd worst organization in Syria, after ISIS that is.
Bernie Sanders is the Trump of the left, a useful idiot for Putin to influence America through, as proven by the fact he woke up early one morning and #PresidentSanders was trending. It's all a Russian conspiracy
You know MSM, always pushing their corporate candida....ah wait...
Ahh.. I had seen that tweet then, just not on here. Didn't realize they'd nuked that guy's account!
Shame. It was some verified twitter user (self-proclaimed Russia/security expert) arguing that since #PresidentSanders was trending at 4AM, he was a Putin psyop. Last I checked it wasn't even ratioed (<300 replies, >500 likes) so I'm surprised it go taken down.
this is the account -
https://twitter.com/gregolear?lang=en
Greg Olear
@gregolear
Author of "#DirtyRubles: An Introduction to Trump/Russia" (2018). #WhoOwnsKavanaugh #WeShallPrevail #Kamala2020 #KHive
https://twitter.com/gregolear?lang=en
Greg Olear
@gregolear
Author of "#DirtyRubles: An Introduction to Trump/Russia" (2018). #WhoOwnsKavanaugh #WeShallPrevail #Kamala2020 #KHive
#Kamala is all you need to know
Biden must be on a windup . He as said that he would consider a Republican as a VP.
He said it but I doubt he would ever realistically consider it.
McCain considered Lieberman briefly iirc but never pursued it for obvious reasons.
Last edited:
Yang having a bit of a mare here...
Maybe in hindsight Lieberman would have been the better choice compared to who he did pick , probably one of the reasons for Trump. But i could see Biden considering it . He sees himself as the uniter in chief . And seems to be playing from the same playbook as Hillary .Trying to win over moderate Republicans.
Is that andrew yang? A chinese guys becoming a potus would be grand.
Yes he is, and I'd say he might even be worse, because he is duping a lot of progressives who think he is actually a progressive.
Yang's platform is very progressive. He does reek of a technocrat though.
I think that McCain said that he regretted listening to his advisers who urged him to not pick Lieberman.
Anyway, the division has become even stronger so I don’t think we will see soon such a thing. Maybe Trump-Mancin :P
It's really not.
That's a gem. To get his UBI, you have to opt out of several other programs. Moreover, not sure if its in this clip, he explicity says that UBI is a way to strip other social welfare benefits down the road, because UBI can be used as leverage.
He's not progressive. He's anti-establishment to an extent, but he's absolutely not a lefty like Sanders is.
Last edited:
Trump - Gabbard 2020
Seriously I think this is entirely possible. She’s positioned herself for it perfectly. He gets a Democrat who is already loved by Republicans for being the Democrat who parrots Republican narratives. He also gets a woman of colour which is hugely important as women are a demographic have been hugely turned off by Trump as obviously are PoCs.
Seriously I think this is entirely possible. She’s positioned herself for it perfectly. He gets a Democrat who is already loved by Republicans for being the Democrat who parrots Republican narratives. He also gets a woman of colour which is hugely important as women are a demographic have been hugely turned off by Trump as obviously are PoCs.
Are there any indications he’s ready to ditch Pence? I’m not sure how crucial Pence is in securing the evangelical vote anymore, but given some recent grumblings you’d think it wouldn’t be something the Trump team would take lightly.
Well he's a capitalist so of course he's not a true lefty but theres huge parts of his program that are progressive like his education policy and gun control and other things. Im not a big fan of his but I think he does get the economic ills affecting alot of people but its all rhetoric given hes got no political track record. I would never vote for him but I can see the appeal. On UBI the regressive tax part is a problem and he is naive if he thinks it will be a magic solution.
Makes a lot of sense... He will always have pussy on hand to grab with his big hands on the campaign trail
Actually... I still think he might pick Ivanka as his VP... She's a piece of ass
The same Andrew Yang who was born in America
Who's parents came from Taiwan (china might consider that part of china but I'm pretty sure America does not)
I don’t see him ditching Pence, and no one bar a few Bernie bros care about Gabbard.
She has also recently said that she doesn’t believe that Trump is not guilty (she said that the reason she didn’t vote about his impeachment was cause the impeachment was done in a partisan manner, not cause she thinks that Trump is innocent).
It hasn’t happened recently and it is not going to happen. There won’t be a Republican/Democrat ticket or vice versa.
He is progressive but he is not a lefty like Sanders. His fiscal policies are a mix of left and right.
He is one of the best candidates.
For many other countries the line wasnt that clear. For what it's worth i dont think he'll win. I know he's a taiwanesse. But to many american he's just another chinese
- Status