Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Doesn't mean a damn thing. You can race bait without being a racist in order to win votes just like Trump talked about draining the swamp without doing a damn thing about it.
And here's an example of race baiting which is pretty tame now compared to Trump:
Jesse Jackson called it a an example of Hitlerian racism.
And then you have crap like this when he was running for governor of Georgia:
This is the same crap that Trump's side does. Now Carter does explain that he didn't mean any of it and funnily enough I kind of believe him but in this case the ends did not justify the means.
Anti-hero Carter.
Carter brought out the evangelicals into national spotlight in the first time for a while and Reagan stole them away from him after he didn't perform to their expectations.
Now they're running rampant in the GOP.
edited 7th Mar '17 12:41:01 PM by MadSkillz
And if you want to believe his former CIA director, Carter also helped arm the Mujahideen which fathered the Taliban.
http://www.counterpunch.org/1998/01/15/how-jimmy-carter-and-i-started-the-mujahideen/
That's old news, everyone knows our involvement with the Mujahideen. Hell Bin Laden was trained by the CIA.
Oh really when?Head of DeVos-backed group resigns in wake of domestic abuse comments
The official statement from the Great Lakes Education Project, where Gary Naeyaert was executive director, says the organization "is taking some time to reorganize to best continue the advocacy of quality school choice options for all Michigan K-12 students."
But Naeyaert drew fire after a Feb. 28 Senate Education Committee meeting in which he talked about his frustration with Natasha Baker, the state school reform officer whose office has drawn fire for identifying 38 chronically failing schools for potential closure.
"I wanted to shake her, like I like to shake my wife when every option in front of you is not possible. They’re all equally unattractive to you. Like when I ask her where to go to dinner and she says anywhere, and I say Steak and Shake, and she says, not Steak and Shake."
Even if all of that is accurate it doesnt make him a "proto-Reagan".
10-real-facts-about-ronald-reagan-that-republicans-never-choose-to-admit
![]()
![]()
![]()
More of a technical truth that overlooks another aspect of things; the CIA and SIS had physical advisors on the ground, but funneled material and financial resources through the plausible deniability provided by the Pakistani government. It was the latter that saw an opportunity to selectively favor the militant groups it preferred over others.
edited 7th Mar '17 1:40:37 PM by FluffyMcChicken
![]()
![]()
I mean that's in addition to that other stuff.
Moving his party to the right. That was Carter.
Dismantling parts of the New Deal. That was Carter.
Bringing the evangelicals into the national field. That was Carter.
Race-baiting to win the presidency. That was Carter.
Neoliberal president peddling supply side economics. That was Carter.
Feeding the military machine. That was Carter.
Moving focus to the Middle East. That was Carter.
When I say he was proto-Reagan, I don't mean they're exact copies but I do think that a lot of the things that Reagan popularized were used by his direct predecessor.
Carter and Reagan were a two hit KO to Social Democracy in the US.
Carter dragged his party to the right and Reagan dragged his party even further right.
Now that's not to say Carter didn't do good because he did but he was the big pivot for the Democrats same as Reagan was for the Republicans.
And depending on whether you can trust a left-wing source there's this.
edited 7th Mar '17 2:00:49 PM by MadSkillz
@Tactical I know he's a Democratic president but we can acknowledge that his presidency was a mess and it's easy to draw parallels between Carter and Reagan.
Now Carter was a much better human being of course who thought he had some destiny to do good even if that meant getting your hands dirty to get in the position to do good.
Hell, New Republic compares Trump to Carter. I'm pretty nice by comparison.
edited 7th Mar '17 2:09:35 PM by MadSkillz
The funding of the Mujahedin warriors in Afghanistan wasn't exactly tied to the Taliban, Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. The Mujahedin by themselves were a loosely organized groups of warlords and guerrilla fighters fighting against the Soviet occupation and puppet government of Afghanistan.
During that time the already radicalized Osama Bin Laden went to Pakistan to aid the Sunni guerrillas in Afghanistan, so basically Bin Laden was another of the many willing to move to Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets and whatever else they didn't like such as Shia groups.
However once the Soviets left and the US stopped supplying money and weapons, those groups of Mujahedin were suddenly in a power vacuum and internal squabbles created a civil war that engulfed what was left of Afghanistan.
During that time, after many warlords died and other groups either got wiped out or disbanded two main factions would struggle for the control of the country: The group that became known as Taliban and the Northern Alliance, which was a collection of two major tribal leaders opposing the Taliban.
The Taliban during that time the Taliban gained the upper hand and controlled most of Afghanistan with the exception of the northern mountain regions of Afghanistan that were under control of the Northern Alliance, aided by the wealth of Bin Laden, the strongest group to rise and take power, which provided Bin Laden a safe haven and training ground for his newly formed group: The Al-Qaeda.
The rest is recent history.
But to sum things up: It is unlikely that the US and CIA directly dealt with Bin Laden, however it is highly likely that Bin Laden received US money to fight in Afghanistan through the Pakistani Intelligence Service, which still had a strong connection with Bin Laden even as the War on Terror developed.
However that feeling of deja vu towards the treatment of the Syrian Civil War lingers.
Inter arma enim silent legesWho would you say is the Pakistan for the Syrian Civil War? Because if you look at it that was the big problem, trusting Pakistan to arm reasonable groups, the ones armed by the CIA or MI 6 directly stayed reasonably loyal, it's the ones Pakistan snuck US money and weapons to that turned into the Taliban.
edited 7th Mar '17 3:08:30 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran2 Senate Democrats request Trump's Tax Returns in the name of National Security
. The last request was turned down but now that it's being framed as a National Security issue, it'll be harder to turn down. The ball is now in Sen. Orrin Hatch's (R-Utah) court.
It's only a matter of time before it actually starts...
edited 7th Mar '17 3:56:56 PM by DingoWalley1
![]()
Two Pakistans in Syria.
Iran for the Shia and Saudi Arabia for the Sunni with Russia (more of Assad than Iran tho) being the sugar daddy of the former and US of the latter.
Anyway whatever mess comes out of it, won't be pretty and surely will give the future US administrations a lot more headaches and I am expecting Trump to make things worse.
Inter arma enim silent legesThe new GOP repeal and replace bill for Obamacare is fucked two ways from Sunday. Very few people like the thing, with some of those very few people being Trump (because it is getting rid of Obamacare) and Ryan (who made the thing). Here are a few reasons:
The Koch brothers' SuperPAC Freedom Partners (warning PDF) is against it.
The Senate's own rules could end up killing it.
Rumor is Breitbart is planning on running an ugly war against it.
I'm probably missing a lot, but still.
Here's an image of a Breitbart article attacking the bill.
edited 7th Mar '17 4:38:39 PM by tclittle
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."![]()
![]()
Who says, it'll be on the US? It'll take a president with some great bravado and love of risk to take up the "leader of the free world" thing again, post-Trump. And that's assuming the US is still intact and able.
Non-interventionism, was already increasingly in vogue on the left, and Trump revived isolationism on the right. That plus memories of the WOT, especially among millennials and the giant humble pie that is Trump in the Oval Office will probably dampen appetites for even facing the world, in the US.
I suspect the buck'll past to Germany and Canada for moral authority and to Kratistos for practical authority.
edited 7th Mar '17 5:20:03 PM by CenturyEye
Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our lives

Trump supports Ryancare, disregards Teapublican words that it won't pass, promises to bring down Drug Prices
. All through Twitter.
Wonder how mad he'll be if the Teapublicans do kill it off?