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
@America in the Middle East: We should focus on what to do in the future (changing policies and all that), not what has occurred in the past. Unfortunately, there is a LOT of power/money invested in that region and changing those policies will be difficult to say the least.
We also can't just pull out right now. There is a good possibility that even a slow draw-down and returning power to the local governments will put things back to the way they were before we went in. An immediate departure would likely be even worse. We are there now and should properly set things up for the future (history has shown what happens if we don't and is the primary reason for not going into Syria as well as the "slow" draw-down currently planned)
@Private Property: But how am I supposed to keep up with the Jones'?
Seriously now, I agree that the creators should have a bit more control over their ideas/products, but most of them wouldn't be able to act on their ideas if not for corporate backing/investment. Giving the company that backed you rights to a portion of the profits makes sense to me. I also agree that copyrights should not be able held onto for so long.
![]()
This is also an issue that has implications on political, economic, and legal levels. It can be legitimately talked about in threads about any of those topics.
edited 15th Jan '13 9:10:32 AM by Belian
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!As part of my daily flogging of Ian Cromwell, I give you: right wing nutters fail history
.
As part of my daily flogging of Charles Pierce, I give you: but not all of them fail at everything
.
edited 15th Jan '13 1:52:42 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."No, they didn't.
Osama was a minor player (at best) during the campaign against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, and was operating with his own resources, not US support. The CIA never trained him.
Both Vietnam and Laos are anti-democratic Single-Party States. The Philippines is a frequent target of Islamic terrorism. East Timor is just a mess. Thailand recently went through a coup d'état. And Myanmar is only now becoming a democracy (and is still wrought with ethnic strife).
And what do we do when those tribal lands harbor terrorists that attack US soil?
Because it is rich with oil (and not attempting to get nuclear weapons).
Because Britain won't let us.
By far the most conservative muslim state in the region that by far contributed the greatest amount of power or finance to the terrorists?
Saudi Arabia did no such thing! Saudi Arabia has been a loyal ally to the US since the Cold War.
And as for the drones, if the choice is using them or letting the Taliban retake Afghanistan; then I'm in full support of the Drones. Also according to the United Nations, the Taliban insurgents were responsible for 75-80% of civilian casualties between 2009 to 2011
And I dare you to name a single real war in the past 50 years that didn't have some civilian causalities.
edited 15th Jan '13 6:27:14 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016
And, while it is a bit coldhearted, as you go back even further, all casualties go up.
We lost X number of solders and killed Y number of civilians in the recent War On Terror (don't have the exact numbers and won't even try to guess). I'm fairly sure we lost more solders on D-Day and probably killed more civilians in a single day of inaccurate bombing during WWII on another day than in this entire "war". Go back even further, and today's numbers look like a rounding error.
While I may or may not agree with what is going on, focusing on the minimal civilian deaths is not an argument that holds much sway if you are willing to compare it to history.
Oh, and while the drones are "un-maned", that does not mean they are "un-piloted" and no-one takes responsibility for killing other people while using them. They just do it from a bit further away and in a safer place.
edited 15th Jan '13 4:38:36 PM by Belian
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!
.....I don't get the point of your post.
Focusing on the minimal civilian deaths is not an argument that holds much sway because other wars in the past were worst?
Is that the message your trying to get across?
edited 15th Jan '13 4:44:07 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016I'm still wondering at this one, Baff.
Your solution to fundamentalist Islamic terrorists attacking us is to - invade Mecca? And Medina? Because that's going to go down so well with the 1.7 billion Muslims across the planet.
As @Deviant points out, the Saudi government is an ally. Like Britain and HSBC, sometimes the people and companies within a country do things that their government doesn't entirely approve of.
edited 15th Jan '13 4:51:02 PM by Bluesqueak
It ain't over 'till the ring hits the lava.
The other wiki
says 1.5-1.6 billion
Maybe people should remember that number the next time they label all muslims as terrorists or islamists.
edited 15th Jan '13 4:57:50 PM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"If Obama approves the Keystone Pipeline, he'll condemn the entire nation into a life with contaminated water.
I say that because the Keystone is a gigantic pipeline connecting Canada to America. The southern half alone has bad protection, in the sense that the oil can spill and slither onto our water supply. That type of fossil fuel infrastructure doesn't work that well in the 21st century.
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.Kostya - It might be 1.6 billion (1,600 million). People don't stand still to be counted.
But yup, worldwide Christianity comes in at 34% of the world population with roughly 2.3 billion, and Islam comes in second with 23% of the world population - around 1.6, 1.7 billion. Then you get Hinduism (15%) and Buddhism (10%).
edited 15th Jan '13 4:58:44 PM by Bluesqueak
It ain't over 'till the ring hits the lava.Obama rejected an attempt a year or so back to force acceptance of a route that went through some aquifers or something in Nebraska. He basically said "no, find another route and do it according to the law", which while a victory, was not a rejection of the pipeline project as a whole. There's still construction going on here in Texas. We had a story recently of them actually building on the land of some lady who hadn't given them any sort of permission. I'm not sure how that ended.
Edit; They were trying to get a route through really quickly without any sort of inspection, which is why it got the attention it did at the time.
edited 15th Jan '13 5:04:05 PM by AceofSpades
He's basically allowing construction of the southern pipeline anyway, really.
I really don't like the idea of a pipeline being constructed on privately owned land without many regulations, which will lead to contaminated water lines.
edited 15th Jan '13 5:11:54 PM by Serocco
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.Well, the problem in the case I mentioned was they were doing it on private property WITHOUT THE LANDOWNER'S PERMISSION. The lady and some actor chick, Darryl Hanna?, ran out to stop the bulldozers. I mean shit, that's illegal, so I really don't think these oil companies actually give a shit about governmental permission in a lot of cases.
But yeah, construction in the south is happening, with most of the actual blocking by government forces going on in the North. Doesn't give a good impression of how the South is viewed as sacrificial by the government. At least in regards to the oil companies; those guys have a hell of a lot of hold on things here.
Rand Paul is a damn moron.
edited 15th Jan '13 5:16:10 PM by AceofSpades
![]()
![]()
![]()
State Rep. Steve Toth to file 'Firearm Protection Act'
The "Firearms Protection Act" bill would make any federal law banning semi-automatic firearms or limiting the size of gun magazines unenforceable within the state's boundaries. Anyone trying to enforce a federal gun ban could face felony charges under the proposal.
edited 15th Jan '13 5:25:03 PM by DrunkGirlfriend
"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian

![[up] [up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png)
Oh, right, with a title like that, how could it be anything other than productive? Baff, this is the problem we have with you, not as conversants but as moderators. You can't accept a neutral baseline for debate.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"