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

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#130151: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:27:15 AM

The MIC makes more money from the fear of and preparation for war than it does war itself.

edited 14th Jul '16 9:28:47 AM by Rationalinsanity

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#130152: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:27:17 AM

@Handle - Gladly. Because he half-asses his foreign policy when it comes to fast-moving situations (Cuba and Iran are successes because he has prep-time and stability aiding him), of which conflicts normally count as, they tend to last longer than absolutely necessary, or he leaves before the job is done and then has to rely on said drones to get piecemeal victories.

The man is too gunshy in that he won't use the full power of the military to end things quick out of fear of looking like Bush. So instead he suffers from the opposite extreme. With Hil, she seems to advocate a balance of the two approaches. Not using the military willy nilly like Bush, but not actively resisting it in ANY situation like Obama.

TerminusEst from the Land of Winter and Stars Since: Feb, 2010
#130153: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:29:20 AM

[up]

[nja]'d

edited 14th Jul '16 9:29:51 AM by TerminusEst

Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#130154: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:29:27 AM

The wording confuses me. They're okay with drone strikes but not air strikes and SOF strikes? What's the difference between a Hellfire strike and an air strike?

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#130155: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:30:08 AM

Volume

Oh really when?
TerminusEst from the Land of Winter and Stars Since: Feb, 2010
#130156: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:31:10 AM

And who's doing it. The CIA and Air Force are quite different in their Ro E.

Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#130157: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:31:32 AM

Enough with the omission bias, Handle. That drone strikes kill innocent people doesn't mean that people getting killed by ISIS/Taliban/whoever because the US didn't bomb them to stop them somehow don't matter. The choice is between the one or the other and it isn't as easy as "Innocent victims!".

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#130158: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:32:51 AM

Using military other than the SOF is also quite different, yet outside of training/advisory roles, they aren't being used.

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#130159: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:34:23 AM

[up][up][up]Oh. I thought those were called "bombardments"?

Obama's problem with pulling out from Iraq and Afghanistan wasn't a matter of when or how many troops, it was a matter of how, and of who he left in power.

[up][up]Yes, I understand that bombingaristriking(?) entire cities DAESH inhabits kills a lot more innocents than the drone strikes. I also hear that kids in the Balkans keep stumbing on unexploded cluster bombs from the nineties. Saving innocents isn't what US military intervention is about, most of the time.

I'd make a blanket beseeching for the USA to get off other people's lawns, but it's not like other powers can help themselves from crashing people's funerals either, so why make an exception?

In short, Obama's problem is not that he uses too little gun. The gun he does use, he could use more smartly. But he's at his best when he's not using gun at all, just carrying it in the holster while holding his hands in his pockets and talking very softly.

edited 14th Jul '16 9:45:33 AM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#130160: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:42:32 AM

Been hearing reports that Trump's going to select Mike Pence.

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#130161: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:46:41 AM

Makes sense. The other front runners have too much of their own pride to work well with Trump, even if they want to work for him.

Julep Since: Jul, 2010
#130162: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:52:00 AM

I really think many people are pretty hard on whistleblowers. It is very, very, very hard to pull it cleanly without endangering anyone. Just look at the amount of people that worked on the Panama Papers, the kind of trust network you need to build, and (so far) the lack of very significant consequences outside of Iceland. I assume (or more accurately hope) that very long investigations are underway (apparently, in France, many of the ones committing fraud ran to the finance ministry to ask to solve the problem ASAP), but you can't really blame people who witnessed some significant crimes to lack subtlety. Subtelty isn't rewarded.

And recently, the Luxleaks whistleblowers got sentenced to jail, while Pricewaterhouse Coopers got away scot-free.

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#130163: Jul 14th 2016 at 9:56:39 AM

[up]That's the problem in a nutshell. We're quick to excuse the authorities commit collateral damage ("it couldn't be helped") or the big power groups getting away with murder and worse for a very affordable fine ("they have good lawyers and connections"). But blow a whistle, hurting some in the process, and suddenly you're the scum of the earth, a rat and a sellout.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#130164: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:00:41 AM

Nah, probably just one or two. And the reasons are called "Military-Industrial Complex"

Now there's a bogeyman for you. The MIC has been around forever. Under every president since WWII. But apparently Clinton is going to give in more to them because...reasons.

Yes, I understand that bombingaristriking(?) entire cities DAESH inhabits kills a lot more innocents than the drone strikes. I also hear that kids in the Balkans keep stumbing on unexploded cluster bombs from the nineties. Saving innocents isn't what US military intervention is about, most of the time.

As for the drone thing, and the unexploded ammo thing, as has already been pointed out to you (and which you pointedly didn't reply to), you are making a lot of assumptions there. Most notably you are assuming that more "innocents" are killed by American intervention than would have been killed had the US not intervened.

Leaving ISIS alone doesn't result in loads of innocent people living happy lives. It results in anyone who deviates even slightly from their lunatic religious dogma getting beheaded. The NATO intervention in Kosovo saved that province from going the way of Bosnia at the hands of a man (Milosevic) who thought rape camps were an acceptable way of going about his business.

EDIT: You also assume that the "unexploded ammo from the nineties" is all American. A whole lot of it is Soviet manufactured stuff that the Serbs, Croats, and Bosnians used against each other.

I'd make a blanket beseeching for the USA to get off other people's lawns, but it's not like other powers can help themselves from crashing people's funerals either, so why make an exception?

So according to you Milosevic should have been left alone to do as he pleased? I'll pass that onto his victims. I'm sure they'll agree.

edited 14th Jul '16 10:04:16 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar

Protagonist506 from Oregon Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
#130165: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:01:50 AM

Over the long term, I'd wager that ISIS kills far more people than Drone Strikes do.

Leviticus 19:34
AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#130167: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:05:02 AM

If anyone has come up with a way to intervene that don't involve collateral damage, the US would love to hear it. International situations are messy things, especially in situations like Kosovo.

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#130168: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:05:52 AM

Most notably you are assuming that more "innocents" are killed by American intervention than would have been killed had the US not intervened.

I'm not assuming anything. But neither you nor I have the numbers on that trolley problem, and in that case I advocate not touching the damned lever. And I really don't like how you put scare quotes around 'innocents'. What are you implying?

As for Milosevic, ISIS, and assorted villains, the problem wasn't that they should be stopped, but the methods they went about in stopping them.

[up][up][up]Thank god for that. For a more pertinent comparison, ISIS isn't killing nearly as many people as Assad's regime.

edited 14th Jul '16 10:07:54 AM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#130169: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:07:49 AM

[up]

As for Milosevic, ISIS, and assorted villains, the problem wasn't that they should be stopped, but the methods they went about in stopping them.

Then how would you have got Saddam out of Kuwait?

Keep Rolling On
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#130171: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:11:51 AM

There may actually be a centrist position to be had here.

As I understand it, the reason drone strikes killing innocent people is a problem that exists is because the CIA is a bit more indiscriminate in its attacks than the Air Force.

Which, mind you, is certainly a problem in need of solving. If people in the CIA are going, "Eh, they're brown people in another country, just smoke 'em all and be done with it," then that needs to stop.

But that doesn't mean the drone strikes themselves are bad. Just that we need better people piloting them.

It's not unlike the police issue we're having right now, where some people are saying, "The police as an institution needs to burn! Get rid of all the cops!" and other people are saying, "No, screw you, it's fine that cops are shooting black kids, let them shoot as many black kids as they want!" and both are wrong.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#130172: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:14:04 AM

[up]&[down] I wholeheartedly agree. If Hillary manages to do these things as cleanly and intelligently as can be reasonably asked, I have no beef with her.

I liked Sanders' attitude on Foreign Policy. It wasn't very concrete, but he seemed like the sort of guy to do mini-Marshall Plans and spend the budget of building a school on building a school rather than on sending a missile. I would have looked forward to that.

@ The Gulf War: it is not among the examples we were discussing. Strikes were against military targets; getting Saddam out of Kuwait was reasonably clean. The problem was the aftermath:

An investigation by Beth Osborne Daponte estimated total civilian fatalities at about 3,500 from bombing, and some 100,000 from the war's other effects

Encouraging the Iraqi dissidents to stir up trouble by promising to liberate them, then abandoning them to Saddam's ministrations, followed by heavy sanctions bringing the country to its knees, that may have been much deadlier than the estimated 3600 civilian dead from the US's air campaign.

edited 14th Jul '16 10:18:52 AM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Julep Since: Jul, 2010
#130173: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:14:09 AM

I don't think Handle said all military interventions were evil and should not occur. There have been "good" foreign interventions, with little civilian and allied casualties (I think Operation Serval in Mali counts). But they require the army/ies that intervene to be smart, to know well about the field and populations, and to cooperate with local army forces instead of ignoring them. And of course, you need to properly prepare the power transition if one is required ("seizing strategic resources" is not a proper power transition, btw).

That's much harder that calling a drone strike. But then, you usually don't get called a war criminal.

edited 14th Jul '16 10:14:48 AM by Julep

AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#130174: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:16:46 AM

As for Milosevic, ISIS, and assorted villains, the problem wasn't that they should be stopped, but the methods they went about in stopping them.

You would have preferred a full scale invasion of Serbia? Because that would have killed a whole lot more people.

But neither you nor I have the numbers on that trolley problem, and in that case I advocate not touching the damned lever.

Sure we do. Milosevic was out to kill and/or rape every non-Serb in Kosovo. If there are still non-Serbs living in Kosovo (which there are) then the US has killed fewer people than Milosevic was planning to.

And I really don't like how you put scare quotes around 'innocents'. What are you implying?

Who qualifies as innocent? I've met far too many people on the anti-interventionist left who seem to think I should mourn the deaths of Serbian soldiers and militiamen the same way that I should mourn Milosevic's actual victims. I don't know where you stand on the issue, but given your very anti-interventionist stance I'd like to hear you define "innocents" before I grant free use of that word.

edited 14th Jul '16 10:18:02 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#130175: Jul 14th 2016 at 10:21:23 AM

And I really don't like how you put scare quotes around 'innocents'. What are you implying?

Who qualifies as innocent? I've met far too many people on the anti-interventionist left who seem to think I should mourn the deaths of Serbian soldiers and militiamen the same way that I should mourn Milosevic's actual victims. I don't know where you stand on the issue, but given your very anti-interventionist stance I'd like to hear you define "innocents" before I grant free use of that word.

This, right here, is exactly why I don't think "innocent" should be used as a noun. I try not to bring it up much because it's really just a pet peeve, but the term "innocents" is a politically-loaded phrase that sidesteps the question of who, specifically, is being harmed in a way that is entirely dependent on overly subjective criteria.

But that might be more of a debate for the Semantics thread.

edited 14th Jul '16 10:22:07 AM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.

Total posts: 417,856
Top