TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#129876: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:16:48 PM

I expect her to hype up the Designated Enemy's sins and demonize them, even though there will be worse tyrants and monsters around, some of whom will be supported by the US. I expect her to strike said Enemy, with wide acceptance if possible, but without if necessary. The US MIC thirst for blood, they need their fox hunts, and she will give them those.

In short you are paranoid. That's all there is to this post. You've got no evidence, and you can't even name "the Designated Enemy". Who's it gonna be? If you can predict the future as you claim, tell us.

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#129877: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:35:21 PM

I dunno, could you have predicted Afghanistan or Irak II before Bush Jr. was elected? Of Operation Just Cause or Irak I before Bush Sr. was?

edited 12th Jul '16 6:36:07 PM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#129878: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:36:31 PM

You're not really disproving his point.

flameboy21th The would-be novelist from California Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: I <3 love!
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#129880: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:38:01 PM

Those things wouldn't have been chosen with the equally unpredictable attack on the Twin Towers, though, so your reasoning falls apart largely because as bullshit as those wars were, they were also in response to/allowed largely because of an attack on the US. So basically you're either predicting another attack, or you're predicting that Clinton is going to find an even more bullshit excuse, which I find highly unlikely. Certainly she wouldn't be supported in such actions.

There's a cause an effect to wars. We don't get involved in such things just because these days. Presidents especially.

edited 12th Jul '16 6:39:01 PM by AceofSpades

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#129881: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:38:02 PM

So I'm taking from this that to people, hawk = warmonger, but not in reality. While Clinton would be willing to resort to force, but isn't likely to do anything unprovoked.

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#129882: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:38:41 PM

What point would that be? That I don't have prophetic powers? I don't. I just extrapolate from previous patterns and public information, which entails uncertainty.

edited 12th Jul '16 6:45:15 PM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#129883: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:40:22 PM

Yeah, but you're leaving out the preceding causes for the Iraq war and just sounding like you think Clinton's going to get into another one just because. That's not exactly a convincing argument for anything other than your own paranoia. Hell, without 9/11, Bush probably would be remembered as one of the most boring presidents we've ever had.

So what, you think someone else is going to launch another 9/11 style attack on us or something? Because I don't see that we're going to vote on another war any time soon without that kind of provocation.

edited 12th Jul '16 6:41:18 PM by AceofSpades

flameboy21th The would-be novelist from California Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: I <3 love!
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#129885: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:42:49 PM

Handle, let me ask you something. Suppose another 9/11 esque attack happens on US soil. Would you be supportive of Clinton taking some kind of action?

flameboy21th The would-be novelist from California Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: I <3 love!
The would-be novelist
#129886: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:45:50 PM

Considering where he comes from, I think not.

Non Indicative Username
AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#129887: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:46:48 PM

So you are predicting that, based on her vote for a war in a time of great uncertainty when the executive branch was lying to the American public and pushing for a war that it claimed was linked to an attack on America...that Clinton—now herself the executive branch rather than someone being lied to by it—will go to war with somebody else at random apropos of nothing? That's just paranoia.

edited 12th Jul '16 6:47:29 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

Antiteilchen In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good. Since: Sep, 2013
In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good.
#129888: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:47:41 PM

they were also in response to/allowed largely because of an attack on the US.
Did anyone seriously believe that there was a connection between Iraq and 9/11? This was so obviously a scapegoat operation. I remember us 14-year-old highschool kids making fun of the Paper-Thin Disguise that were the "reasons" for the invation.

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#129889: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:51:20 PM

"Some kind of action" is very broad. I'd start by saving many, many times the amount of dead by investing heavily in healtcare and social security, public transportation, improved roads, education, and subsidized sports. And a tax hike on alcohol and tobacco. And, you know what, some federal gun license regulation. And cop retraining. But perhaps you meant "kill some motherfuckers"? Sure, why not. But a manhunt need not involve an entire country.

But need to go that far. There's genocides and atrocities happening right now, to people the US don't really care about except as resources and score points. Choosing a villain, among the many available, and playing the role of World Police, isn't difficult.

[up]They were connected insofar as US citizens were frothing at the mouth and easy marks for a con. Confused revenge fantasies will do that for you.

[up][up]I'm sure she'd never do it a propos of nothing: the public must be given a Silly Reason for War to willingly offer their money and their lives to the cause.

Also, what uncertainty?

edited 12th Jul '16 6:56:23 PM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Antiteilchen In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good. Since: Sep, 2013
In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good.
#129890: Jul 12th 2016 at 6:54:02 PM

Yeah, if "taking action" means rashly attacking an unrelated country and plunging it into over a decade of chaos, I'd rather have she wouldn't do anything to be honest.

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#129891: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:04:40 PM

Enough thought they were connected that we went over there, Antielchin. The problem with a question like that is that answering it accurately requires me or anyone else you ask it to either know everyone in Congress or be omniscient. But considering we went over there I'm going to guess that yes, enough people in the right place to make that particular choice did, in fact, believe there was a connection. Maybe next time you shouldn't ask if they believed it but why, which is far more salient to the situation.

There general point here is that Handle seems to be thinking that Clinton is, as a matter of course, going to get involved in a conflict, when all the stuff with Iraq and the Middle East had a place where it started, a thing that led up to it. Handle's not pointing out any current conflict he thinks will lead to Clinton making the decision to go to war, he's just assuming that's what's going to happen while ignoring that there were preceding incidents that allowed Iraq to happen.

edited 12th Jul '16 7:05:39 PM by AceofSpades

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#129892: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:10:42 PM

could you have predicted Afghanistan or Irak II before Bush Jr. was elected? Of Operation Just Cause or Irak I before Bush Sr. was?

Sure.

International Relations experts have been doing this for years. If you'd asked an IR expert in early 2001 "if a group supported by the Taliban and sheltered by them launch a devastating attack on the US and the Taliban refused to hand them over, how would the US respond?" they'd have told you then and there that the US would have started blowing shit up big time.

If you'd asked if Bush Junior and his forign policy advisors were people who disliked Saddam, saw the job as half done and we're looking for an excuse to overthrow Saddam then you'd have been told yes that's exactly the kind of people they are.

Iraq 1 was slightly less ways to predict, but Saddam was a know madman so him going off on one and invading Kuwait wasn't super out of character. The US stepping in was likewise kinda expectable but so was the possibility that it would sit on the sidelines. Also I fail to see how defending Kuwait was wrong, dear god even the Russians signed of on it.

Just Cause and Panama isn't my area of expertise but yeah it was probably predictable. Find a Central America expert and they'd probably be able to explain the warning signs.

edited 12th Jul '16 7:12:21 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.” ~ Cyran
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#129893: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:15:18 PM

Iraq as a nationstate was and is fundamentally flawed. Saddam could have died of old age and the same thing would have happened. The only true sin was not having a plan after the shock and awe phase to put it together again properly...the Iraq Vote would be irrelevant if not for that fact.

Now, was 9/11 being used an excuse to clean house? Yeah, that part was obvious at the time. However, also at that time, no one (until evidence came to the contrary afterwards) truely thought Saddam was the beaten shadow of his former self, and that was mostly due to his own propaganda to make him seem as though he was still the powerful tyrant of the 80s. The US bought into it, which is why evidence was forged in the first place; the people responsible honestly thought (to the point of delusion) that it'd be such a tiny white lie no one would realize because the evidence was in fact there in their eyes. That they just didn't have enough intel sources there to confirm it. THAT mindset was mostly a result of the behavior of dictators in general from decades previous as well; No dictator ever stayed down unless removed. They would always try to come back as a threat. Saddam especially so.

So, tldr: Hillary wasn't working on inept judgment nor was she some warmonger. She was working off of the context of that particular dictator's history and the general history of dictatorships the thirty years previous.

EDIT- [nja] bunnehs.

edited 12th Jul '16 7:16:12 PM by FFShinra

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#129894: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:16:19 PM

The Russians were desperate to be the US's new besties at the time. Saddam wouldn't have dared to strike if a certain US Ambassador hadn't said:''

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Antiteilchen In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good. Since: Sep, 2013
In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good.
#129895: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:16:26 PM

Enough thought they were connected that we went over there

Or they were just looking for a scapegoat, you know. One that even satisfied the military contractors. It was obvious to the public at the time that there was no connection. The UN was against. Most Governments opposed it, the British public opposed it. Everyone else knew the reasons were a bloody smokescreen. If the people with access to more information were so blind or braindead, I wouldn't want them anywhere near decision making positions.

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#129896: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:17:30 PM

[up]You keep missing the point: No, not everyone knew it was a ruse, including the ones in the administration creating the actual ruse.

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#129897: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:18:58 PM

[up]That is an insane stance. We're not missing your point, we just think it's delusional.

edited 12th Jul '16 7:20:21 PM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#129898: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:21:23 PM

[up] It's true, though. Cheney's cabal handled the messaging via the time-honored tactic of planting stories in the news media about Iraq's WMDs, then citing those stories as corroboration when they gave their speeches. Meanwhile, the CIA was basically hogtied into delivering reports containing every statistical and logical fallacy in the book designed to make flimsy or known-false information look like reliable evidence, and blacklisted anyone who dared challenge them. A major part of this was the torture program at Guantanamo, from whose interrogation results tidbits were cherry-picked that "corroborated" the administration's narrative.

Many of the people seriously talking up the need for war honestly believed the fake stories because the entire media establishment, save a few outliers that could be written off as unpatriotic, commie/liberal terrorist sympathizers, was busy repeating each other's reporting back to the public, never bothering to check where the information ultimately came from.

edited 12th Jul '16 7:25:10 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#129899: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:28:04 PM

Yeah the US ambassador screwed up, it's the exact same thing the UK did with the Falklands and the US did with Gerogia and South Ossetia. It was a screw up and a big one, but I fail to see how that means the US should have let Saddam anex Kuwait.

the British public opposed it.

Nope, the British public were largly in favour of war, many marched against the war but a lot were for it.

Hell we just had our report on Iraq, Blair has been judged to have honestly in good faith believed that it was legal (because the Attorney General said it was) and that Saddam had WM Ds (because the intelligence chiefs said he did). Now both of thosue stances were wrong but that's the fault of the Attorney General and the head of British Intelligence.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#129900: Jul 12th 2016 at 7:45:29 PM

And like I said, the trend before then generally would have supported their evidence because thats what dictators did for years. Thats why those who were deluded thought they could get away with it. Because when does a dictator stop trying to be a Bond Villain out of practicality? Unheard of at the time.


Total posts: 417,856
Top