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

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159451: Nov 29th 2016 at 8:58:29 PM

[up] You know very little of 19th century geopolitics then. Japan's declaration of war was sensible by the logic of the 19th century, having not suffered much during World War I or really been much an active player at all, Japan's geopolitical mindset simply wasn't up to date, much in the same way France was stuck in the WWI mindset. Japan expected a swift, brokered peace where they exchanged lands and got a bit of cash because that's what happened in the numerous colonial wars of the 19th century. That was reinforced by the experience of the Russo-Japanese war, which was one example of such wars.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:00:40 PM by CaptainCapsase

MonsieurThenardier Searching from Murika Since: Nov, 2016 Relationship Status: Getting away with murder
Searching
#159452: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:00:55 PM

Japan's declaration of war was sensible by the logic of the 19th century,
In other words, completely delusional. "Hey, they would've been a rational actor if it was 100 years ago!" isn't a logical response to the accusation of them not being a rational actor.

having not suffered much during World War I, Japan's geopolitical mindset simply wasn't up to date. They expected a swift, brokered peace where they exchanged lands and got a bit of cash because that's what happened in the numerous colonial wars of the 19th century.
The Japanese weren't blind people who hadn't paid attention to any war in the past 40 years, or their own war in China. There were many among them who acknowledged that going to war with the USA would not lead to a quick capitulation. They were ignored and the war went ahead anyway, because to do otherwise would mean losing face.

If Japan was a rational actor, there would not have been a Pacific War. They simply would've withdrawn from their economically draining war in China. Fuck, if Japan was a rational actor, they wouldn't have let a bunch of junior officers start wars. If Japan was a rational actor, officers wouldn't physically assault underlings when told that their plans were impossible.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:02:44 PM by MonsieurThenardier

"It is very easy to be kind; the difficulty lies in being just."
JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159453: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:01:27 PM

The point Julian is trying to make, I think, is that there's not really a very strong case for "Humanitarian Intervention" being anything more than a modern incarnation of the white man's burden, namely a rationalization for imperialism.

I wouldn't say it's a modern incarnation because the idea of spreading democracy by force of arms goes back to Ancient Athens during the Peloponnese War, and returned disastrously during the French Revolution when the Girondins launched a crusade for war (supported by Thomas Paine and Condorcet and other Christopher Hitchens predecessors of that time). Without that war you would have no Reign of Terror, no Napoleon.

—> "Out of a toxic mixture of ignorance, wishful thinking, and pure, naked ambition, the Girondins were pushing France towards wars that would last for twenty-three years and take millions of lives."
David A. Bell, The First Total War

In both cases, the idea to spread democracy abroad led to an end of it at home.

Way to miss the point on pretty much everything.

I actually don't think we disagree...its merely about rhetoric. The general conclusions and views are the same.

And for the love of God, don't denounce people you disagree with as "Mc Carthyist". You don't see anyone denouncing you as a Stalinist or anything equally inane.

Historically speaking, "hard-left" meant Stalinist since Stalin was on the Left and boy was he hard. However, I concede your point.

I just want to emphasize the view that International Relations and peace between nations is something that genuinely does transcend Left-Right debates. In terms of foreign policy I agree with the Republican Clint Eastwood (who opposes the war in Iraq and Afghanistan) more then I do with the Democrat Obama (who was against Iraq but okay with Afghanistan).

PS—Before you claim that this is the kind of thinking that justified the invasion of Iraq, don't even go there. Being aware people are getting hurt does not necessarily mean you invade their country to help them (in fact that's downright counterproductive most of the time).

On that I agree. It's just that rhetorically I don't think it makes sense anymore to say Putin is an authoritarian and so-and-so is also authoritarian when in reality its liberal regimes that are a minority in the world. It doesn't make sense because 1) Most people don't know how to help them institutionally, 2) Don't actually want to help them, 3) Only bring up authoritarians who they dislike and 4) In the end just make things worse.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159454: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:03:23 PM

[up][up] And yet France made a very similar mistake. It's also more like being 40 years behind rather than 100 (the Spanish American war comes to mind), and that's a mistake that's been made many, many times over the course of history. Obviously there were people who realized that the Japanese mindset was in the wrong century, but they simply weren't the ones making the call.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:04:20 PM by CaptainCapsase

MonsieurThenardier Searching from Murika Since: Nov, 2016 Relationship Status: Getting away with murder
Searching
#159455: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:04:18 PM

[up]Wrong. France didn't start a world war, and they expected a long, drawn-out, plodding conflict in the event of one. Their doctrine was built around it.

that's a mistake that's been made many, many times over the course of history. Obviously there were people who realized that the Japanese mindset was in the wrong century, but they simply weren't the ones making the call.
Of course, because the Japanese High Command was motivated by face rather than strategic realities. You can't simply forget that, it was vital to every single decision they made.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:05:20 PM by MonsieurThenardier

"It is very easy to be kind; the difficulty lies in being just."
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159456: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:05:09 PM

[up] Right in the sense that France was defeated because they were fighting the wrong war.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:05:34 PM by CaptainCapsase

MonsieurThenardier Searching from Murika Since: Nov, 2016 Relationship Status: Getting away with murder
Searching
#159457: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:05:56 PM

[up]That has absolutely nothing to do with Japan ignoring reality for the sake of face. It's a non-sequitur.

BTW, telling your superior officer that their plans were literally impossible wouldn't get you physically assaulted in the French army. To my knowledge. Which was the case in the Japanese army even prior to the Pacific War.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:07:06 PM by MonsieurThenardier

"It is very easy to be kind; the difficulty lies in being just."
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159458: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:06:52 PM

[up] It's only different because France is part of the west, I strongly suspect. France being 20 years behind on strategic thinking isn't that far from Japan being 40 years behind.

MonsieurThenardier Searching from Murika Since: Nov, 2016 Relationship Status: Getting away with murder
Searching
#159459: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:09:04 PM

It's only different because France is part of the west, I strongly suspect. France being 20 years behind on strategic thinking isn't that far from Japan being 40 years behind.
No, it's a simple matter of you failing to see the difference between the High Command of an army making a bad strategic decision and an entire country's military being collectively deluded to the point where they will start wars that they don't believe they will win. Most importantly, in both cases the psychology was entirely different.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:31:07 PM by MonsieurThenardier

"It is very easy to be kind; the difficulty lies in being just."
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159460: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:10:18 PM

[up] I'm not sure why you seem so infatuated with cultural arguments.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:10:59 PM by CaptainCapsase

nombretomado (Season 1) Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#159461: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:12:12 PM

It is possible to have a political discussion without getting personal.

Let's try that now.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159462: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:12:19 PM

[up][up][up] "Cultural psychology" is the same school of thought which suggest blacks and Latinos are poor because of their culture. Not necessarily racist, but uncomfortably close to it.

Japan knew they had very slim odds, but since the alternative was giving up their colonial empire, which to them meant becoming a de facto puppet of the United States, they chose to play the odds.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:13:23 PM by CaptainCapsase

MonsieurThenardier Searching from Murika Since: Nov, 2016 Relationship Status: Getting away with murder
Searching
#159463: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:13:34 PM

[up][up][up]I like reality over fantasy. You're completely ignoring how they actually made their decisions. Even though Imperial Japan is fairly well-documented government. They were not in any way based on any kind of reasonable logic or military realities.

Here's a good example. Mark Parillo, in his book on the annihilation of the Japanese merchant marine, has to devote a significant amount of his book to explaining why a nation so willfully ignored such an obvious threat. Even many Japanese officers knew that their envisioned war was basically impossible due to this issue. Parillo lists many intersecting causes, but one is that Japan's economic experts posited such a grim picture of the coming war (any rational calculation showed that the merchant navy would be annihilated in short order, and that they couldn't do what High Command demanded even if they weren't) that they were simply ignored. Or in some cases, said economic experts were physically beaten and thrown out.

"Commander Oi Atsushi [of the Combined Escort Forces] said that once a General Staff operations officer complained that Oi's remarks on economics were 'contaminating his ears'."

[Parillo, "The Japanese Merchant Marine in WWII," p.26]

edited 29th Nov '16 9:16:22 PM by MonsieurThenardier

"It is very easy to be kind; the difficulty lies in being just."
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159464: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:16:31 PM

Yes, I suppose this thread is on the subject of American politics, not history.

pwiegle Cape Malleum Majorem from Nowhere Special Since: Sep, 2015 Relationship Status: Singularity
Cape Malleum Majorem
#159465: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:17:35 PM

It never fails. Somebody references a controversial topic, then tries to sidestep it by saying, "But I don't want to get into a debate about that..." So what happens? A shitstorm of debate over that very topic.

If you don't want to be swarmed by angry hornets, then don't poke the beehive, m'kay?

This Space Intentionally Left Blank.
TotemicHero No longer a forum herald from the next level Since: Dec, 2009
No longer a forum herald
#159466: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:17:51 PM

We have a thread specifically for discussing the nuclear bombing of Japan, FYI.

Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159467: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:18:18 PM

[up][up] Nevermind, I misred your post.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:22:29 PM by CaptainCapsase

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159468: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:28:54 PM

I only discussed that topic by citing it as part of Truman's overall policy record. Which also included other domestic and global blunders, and which set a precedent and set in motion woes that continue to plague America.

Anyway, I think I might as well go ahead and fully Rank my list of best Presidents Since 1932. My criteria is What they did with the circumstances given to them, domestic policy record and foreign policy.

1) FDR

2) LBJ

3) Nixon

4) Eisenhower

5) Obama

6) Clinton

7) Truman

8) JFK

9) Bush I

10) Ford

11) Carter

12) Reagan

13) Bush II

On basis of Foreign Policy the Top Five are 1) FDR, 2) Obama, 3) Nixon, 4) Bush I, 5) Eisenhower.

On basis of Domestic Policy, its 1) FDR, 2) LBJ, 3) Nixon, 4) Eisenhower, 5) Obama.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:32:36 PM by JulianLapostat

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#159469: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:29:41 PM

I'd put Reagan below GWB to be honest.

New Survey coming this weekend!
JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159470: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:31:55 PM

As ASOIAF fans will lament:

"Reagan was mad, Dubya was madder, Trump is maddest of them all."

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#159471: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:40:00 PM

Yo, someone HAS to caption this photo.

That's the face of a man who's dying inside

New Survey coming this weekend!
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#159472: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:42:16 PM

Trump looks like a cartoon villain in that photo LMAO

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159473: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:42:31 PM

It reminds me of the final lines of Scorsese's Casino:

"But in the end, I wound up right back where I started. I could still pick winners, and I could still make money for all kinds of people back home. And why mess up a good thing? And that's that."

Romney is trapped in hell, his soul belongs to the Devil, and The Devil Is a Loser.

edited 29th Nov '16 9:43:17 PM by JulianLapostat

MadSkillz Destroyer of Worlds Since: Mar, 2013 Relationship Status: I only want you gone
Destroyer of Worlds
#159474: Nov 29th 2016 at 9:51:27 PM

I don't care about Romney's soul so hopefully Trump makes him SOS and not Giuliani or Petraeus aka General Leaks State Secrets to his Mistress

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
#159475: Nov 29th 2016 at 10:05:15 PM

By the way could the people calling democracy toppling invasions "humanitarian interventions" give some examples please, as the concept of humanitarian intervention under that name only emerged in the '90s.

Now yes it had roots in the old White Man's Burder (though that only if one ignores interventions carried out by non-whites, with the explicit consent of non-white and with the active partipation of non-whites, which people do seem to be doing for their own ends here...) but the actual concept of humanitarian intervention wasn't referred to as such until the '90s, before that it was "fighting communism" or "bringing civilisation to the savages" '

Honestly the attempts to use historical precedent are cheep, there is a difference between helping people who ask for help and forcing oneself on those who have not asked for help. If you can't tell the difference that's on you.

Likewise if you choose to ignore the historical examples of both successful interventions and disasterous non-interventions then you're not applying historical context properly.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

Total posts: 417,856
Top