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
That was before the failed coup, soon after which Erdogan made a visit to Moscow that is strongly implied to have smoothed over most if not all of the crinkles in their relationship regarding the Syrian Civil War.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Well then we need to do something about that immediately. Any sort of Russian/Turkish alliance runs completely against everything NATO stands for.
The whole reason Turkey is in there is be a buffer zone and prevent the Russians from having direct land access to the middle east. It's why we tolerate Erdogan openly funding and arming ISIS.
edited 24th Oct '16 11:19:45 AM by LeGarcon
Oh really when?@Silas: And you don't think the Russians would abandon the Kurds just as quickly as the United States will? I imagine they'd prefer a single state under Russian domination rather than a handful that stand with them and another handful that stand with the United States.
@Garcon: What do you propose? Invading Turkey isn't an option, and I don't think sanctions will actually do all that much other than push Turkey further toward's Russia's camp.
edited 24th Oct '16 11:26:24 AM by CaptainCapsase
Sanders is prepared to be a liberal thorn in Clinton’s side
.
Some people here might be irritated by Sanders saying this sort of thing, but I'm in favor of it. I do believe that Clinton will do good for America, but I think she needs to be held accountable as well.
Oh God! Natural light!I have no objection to Sanders playing as a Morality Chain to Clinton. I just don't want him sabotaging pragmatic solutions if the alternative is getting nothing done because he causes too many Senators to revolt.
edited 24th Oct '16 11:36:29 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
![]()
![]()
Your link needs to be run through a URL shortener. I'm getting a runtime error, and that site doesn't play nice with this forum.
But Sanders holding Clinton accountable sounds good, if he does it after the election and (provided Clinton keeps/tries to keep her core promises) doesn't undermine the Dems for 2018 and 2020.
edited 24th Oct '16 11:38:34 AM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.That's a rather gross assumption based on basically nothing, Capsase. Quite frankly, I can't imagine that many in government right now seriously want a war because the public is fucking tired of all the stuff in the Middle East.
Plus it flies in the face of the recent efforts to make peace with Iran and the fact that North Korea is highly ineffectual and relies on China.
edited 24th Oct '16 11:40:27 AM by AceofSpades
![]()
![]()
Damn it, sorry - that keeps happening with me. How can I do that?
edited 24th Oct '16 11:39:54 AM by KarkatTheDalek
Oh God! Natural light!@ Capsase:
You mean due to events like Brexit (and the constant threat of Scottish Independence), Catalonia, Hungary and the other events in Europe, Duterte in the Philippines and Abe's more independent foreign policy in Japan?
edited 24th Oct '16 11:42:15 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnIf there is war with North Korea, it will be the Norks that start it. Attacking them outside of a response or a imminent attack would bring too many consequences for the US and its Asian allies, I could also see China deciding that Kim isn't worth the trouble and removing (possibly while America and friends flatten the KPA, hopefully before South Korea is flattened) him in favor of a puppet.
And Iran is too tough a nut to crack, and you could see a thaw in relations if the nuclear deals holds and the reformers make enough progress. The US is already overtaxed in the ME, and Iran would be far harder to occupy than Afghanistan and Iraq.
And frankly, the Beltway would be happy with the results of in progress procurements. You've got new carriers, the F-35 (when the kinks come out), the new refueling tanker, the B-21, modernizing the nuclear triad... Lots of money there. Whereas a costly war would just threaten their position.
Better off to assert America's sphere of influence in Europe.
edited 24th Oct '16 11:45:18 AM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Because there's a (justified) fear of a domino effect occuring if countries starting realigning themselves away from the US. If the Phillipines seriously align with China, Japan will likely strike out on it's own (it has the economy to be a major power) bringing Australia and other countries in Oceania along with it. Likewise if Turkey flips to Russia, the Middle East is wide open for Russia to start installing friendly governments given the current chaos. The prospect of a multipolar world is something that America finds utterly intolerable.
edited 24th Oct '16 11:44:59 AM by CaptainCapsase
Capsace, this constant paranoia that people at the high levels of government are "spoiling for a war" is just absurd. It's anti-establishment fantasy. To be sure, the sentiment in question exists, but it's mainly on one side of the aisle and it's fomented by the military-industrial complex that backs them. There is no shadowy Democratic conspiracy looking for the next place to invade to wave America's dick around on the global stage, and Clinton is not a warmonger. Get this out of your head if you want to be taken seriously. The straw keeps poking out of your arguments.
edited 24th Oct '16 11:48:50 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"How to use TinyURL:
Take your long link. The one we're using here is this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanders-is-prepared-to-be-a-liberal-thorn-in-clintons-side/2016/10/24/aaf6dd88-97eb-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html
Go to tinyurl.com.
Paste your long link into the box at the most prominent part of the page. (It's really obvious.)
Click the button to make the link tiny.
This is the resulting URL in this case: http://tinyurl.com/jkychca.
So you can use that in your Pot Hole to the article. Like so
.
EDIT:
. Also, I see that I found the original source via Google, while you had a repost of it. (Doesn't matter either way.)
edited 24th Oct '16 11:46:27 AM by BestOf
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.

The Russians are aligned with the Turks?
Since when?
Oh really when?