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

Wariolander Since: Nov, 2017
#238676: Apr 13th 2018 at 4:34:00 PM

Why the fuck do the UK and France want to be part of this Syria thing?

edited 13th Apr '18 4:34:25 PM by Wariolander

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#238677: Apr 13th 2018 at 4:38:33 PM

Because letting people get away with using chemical weapons sets a bad precedent.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#238678: Apr 13th 2018 at 4:44:43 PM

And Russia just made an assassination attempt on British soil involving chemical agents.

Wariolander Since: Nov, 2017
#238679: Apr 13th 2018 at 4:46:31 PM

I can see why the UK would, but why France? They stayed out of the Iraq War...

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#238680: Apr 13th 2018 at 4:48:20 PM

... because these are confirmed chemical agents, not theoretical ones? It's not hard to spot the difference.

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#238681: Apr 13th 2018 at 4:54:32 PM

[up]x8 The only system there that can meaningfully engage our high end assets is the S400, and the low frequency radars they use to track stealth aircraft have a very limited ability to resolve targets. The general consensus is that a small strike package could easily get in and out and destroy those systems, or other targets while evading fire. And as far as BMD, like with Patriot a massed strike can easily overwhelm the system.

Of course, it’s a moot point since killing Russians is a no go.

They should have sent a poet.
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#238682: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:05:11 PM

Can the S-400 defeat a B-2's stealth?

I mean, its academic due to Trump's dithering. Unless you want to risk killing a few dozen Russians, your options are to bombard a few empty bases.

So much winning....

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#238683: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:18:14 PM

If the B-2 gets too close or is spotted by other assets, yes it can.

Oh really when?
Imca (Veteran)
#238684: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:18:50 PM

The Russian low frequency radar can.... and IIRC the S-400 is slaved to an external radar.

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#238685: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:23:49 PM

The problem with low frequency radar is that the low frequency means it has a very low resolution. It can detect the presence of stealth aircraft when checked against conventional radars, but it has trouble forming an image of them. The real risk when it comes to stealth aircraft are predictable flight patterns, if you know where an aircraft is gonna be it's a lot easier to shoot down. All of the shootdowns on stealth aircraft to date have been done that way.

Really though, whether it can or not doesn't matter. If there's even a single Russian sitting at the controls we aren't gonna do anything, unless we feel like risking WW3. We can still significantly degrade Assad's capabilities regardless, with strikes on his infrastructure. That would be where France and the UK could get in, aircraft based from RAF Akrotiri could strike targets in Syria on short order.

edited 13th Apr '18 5:28:42 PM by archonspeaks

They should have sent a poet.
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
#238686: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:31:19 PM

So what happened to the “breaking news on Deputy AG #Rosenstein (Special Counsel Mueller's boss) between 2pm and 4pm EST”, did it just not happen?

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#238687: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:33:46 PM

Best I can think of is one Republican (I think Nunes) has a draft (but hasn't filed) of impeachment for Rosenstein.

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
TheRoguePenguin Since: Jul, 2009
#238688: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:34:45 PM

Someone must have talked Trump out of being a complete moron today.

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#238689: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:36:08 PM

If I were Cohen, I’d fucking flee to a non extradition treaty country before indictment. He’s pretty much going to spend the rest of his life behind bars otherwise.

New Survey coming this weekend!
fruitpork Since: Oct, 2010
#238690: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:43:17 PM

Nunes and two others are trying to put rosenstein into a bind to release information or refuse and get fired. That’s what happened. Although trump hasn’t fired sessions yet, so if he’s really stupid and forgets to fire him first sessions will just appoint another person to shield mueller.

AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#238691: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:50:02 PM

I find it rather odd that, years after the Cold War, we've apparently become more afraid of WWIII breaking out if we kill Russian advisors during airstrikes and the like.

UN forces shot down Soviet pilots over Korea and vice versa. Americans shot down Soviet pilots over Vietnam and vice versa. Soviet military personnel were killed in any number of proxy wars in Africa and the Middle East, by American allies, and Americans died in proxy wars at the hands of Soviet allies. At no point did it start World War III.

It's one thing to say that striking Assad is out because if Russians are killed it will cause a diplomatic incident. It absolutely would. But the Third World War talk is pretty hyperbolic.

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#238692: Apr 13th 2018 at 5:51:59 PM

[up] Yeah, that may have been a little hyperbole for dramatic effect on my part. I do think it would go beyond the scale of a simple diplomatic incident though, given the tensions involved and Russia's do-or-die stance in Syria.

They should have sent a poet.
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#238693: Apr 13th 2018 at 6:00:46 PM

It would be more than shooting down a Russian pretending to be in the NVA or something.

Attacking Khmeimim would be like Russia sending a bunch of cruise missiles into Ramstein.

Oh really when?
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#238694: Apr 13th 2018 at 6:00:50 PM

Trump is addressing the nation on Syria tonight, and Pence might be returning from South America early.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/us-trump-syria

Something is coming...

edited 13th Apr '18 6:02:04 PM by Rationalinsanity

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#238695: Apr 13th 2018 at 6:04:53 PM

I find it rather odd that, years after the Cold War, we've apparently become more afraid of WWIII breaking out if we kill Russian advisors during airstrikes and the like.

UN forces shot down Soviet pilots over Korea and vice versa. Americans shot down Soviet pilots over Vietnam and vice versa. Soviet military personnel were killed in any number of proxy wars in Africa and the Middle East, by American allies, and Americans died in proxy wars at the hands of Soviet allies. At no point did it start World War III.

It's one thing to say that striking Assad is out because if Russians are killed it will cause a diplomatic incident. It absolutely would. But the Third World War talk is pretty hyperbolic.

Quite, that's why all of the talk of "Hillary's going to set up a No Fly Zone and start WW3" during the election was so infuriating in its stupidity. No sane nation is going to start a probable nuclear war over a few dead pilots, and Russia is most certainly a sane nation.

edited 13th Apr '18 6:05:40 PM by Fourthspartan56

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
LinkToTheFuture A real bad hombre from somewhere completely different Since: Apr, 2015 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
A real bad hombre
#238696: Apr 13th 2018 at 6:09:33 PM

Should I worry about escalation with Russia? I'm surrounded by targets

"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." -Thomas Edison
TheWildWestPyro from Seattle, WA Since: Sep, 2012 Relationship Status: Healthy, deeply-felt respect for this here Shotgun
AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#238698: Apr 13th 2018 at 6:09:43 PM

It would be more than shooting down a Russian pretending to be in the NVA or something.

Attacking Khmeimim would be like Russia sending a bunch of cruise missiles into Ramstein.

No it wouldn't, because Ramstein's not in a warzone. It would be more akin to killing Soviet (and Chinese) personnel in a bombing run in North Vietnam. Which the Americans did repeatedly I might note, without prompting either the Soviets or the Chinese to directly confront American troops on the ground.

I concur that it's not a risk that's worth taking—but I wish people would stop acting like World War III is right around the corner. It was irritating when the Trump/Putin fanboys were insisting Clinton's no-fly zone would "start a war with Russia" and this just feels like more of the same.

Are there things America could do that would legitimately risk a violent confrontation with Russia? Yes. Are all of those things fare more likely to happen than they should with Trump in charge? Yes. But we should save our panic for when one of those things happens.

LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#238699: Apr 13th 2018 at 6:11:44 PM

It would be because it's an airbase of similar importance.

Syria is 100% a hill Russia will start WW3 over. It's one of their only warm water ports and the launching point for all their operations in the Middle East.

They cannot be removed from it. This is not some glorified border skirmish like so many other Cold War era proxies.

Oh really when?
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#238700: Apr 13th 2018 at 6:13:30 PM

Probably why the strikes are so limited, hitting chemical weapon sites instead of real bases.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

Total posts: 417,856
Top