The News Thread

[Dak]

And I would argue that the faction that has been in power since WW2 is anti-Western/U.S.

I recommend some more reading on China. The devotion and interest in a market capitalist system is going to cause massive problems and facilitate a massive social movement within 2 decades IMO. I wrote a research paper on this, especially inter-China migrant labor.

China just recently sided with the U.S. on North Korea, is that a first?

The faction in power from WWII to 1991 were Soviet Communists so of course. Since then it's a mixed bag.

It's possible the long game in China is just longer than 3 decades, but two more decades is really long. It depends on the level of nationalism and racial interest the Chinese hold to. Even if the Communist Party loses control, it doesn't mean China turns into a globalist Progressive paradise.

Now you're twisting the example. Cuba was Cuba because of nuclear destruction. We have no interest in establishing even military bases in Syria as far as I know.

If you're real concern is proximity and threat to Russian national security, you're analogy should have been Poland/Baltic Sea states as they have begged for more and more U.S. military involvement and defense systems since the invasion of Ukraine.

You're missing the connection because it's not straight apples to apples in concrete terms. Russia sees itself as needing a naval port in the Mediterranean. It recently signed a deal with Cyprus for some port access but that's a tenuous deal and it's access rather than a base. Russia has its hooks in Assad and a longstanding deal for a full naval base under Russian control. If they lose that, they lose the ability to project pretty much any power by sea outside the North Atlantic/Baltic/Arctic. This makes it similarly as problematic to national interest/security as nukes off the coast.

the podcast, not the speaker. I listened for ~20 minutes and lost interest as nothing provocative or noteworthy was being said. Trumpian level challenges of the information available surrounding the attack (that, interestingly enough, your boy Mattis said full heartedly in that youtube press conference that RUS was involved and Assad).

But the Cuba reference was legitimately a terrible point and how the narrator/host allowed that point to go unchecked was ridiculous. Paraphrasing/misquoting; "I think Syria today is more dangerous than Cuba in the 60s...because Syria is going to force the U.S. and RUS to treat Syria like Cuba" I don't know much about this dude and his resume is stellar, but i'm starting to think he's a political scientist and that's how shit like that gets said

It's interesting how "nothing provocative or noteworthy" was said, even when the speaker disagreed with your whole orientation to the issue. You can obviously feel free to disagree with the guy and myself about the Cuba connection, but I feel pretty comfortable in the company I have on this.

What Mattis says doesn't challenge anything I've said about the seriousness of the situation. I'm trusting that the missile strike will be as far as it goes because Mattis, Trump, and Tillerson know better. Obviously the limited strike helps Trump out politically, "bigly". Triggering a war with Russia doesn't.

 

[rms]

This makes it similarly as problematic to national interest/security as nukes off the coast.

just disagreeing here. really reaching IMO -- done here though

You can obviously feel free to disagree with the guy and myself about the Cuba connection, but I feel pretty comfortable in the company I have on this.

it made no sense. "It's worse than the Cuban missile crisis because it might become the Cuban missile crisis" -- that's a ridiculously stupid statement. and that was literally all he went with it. unless he goes back to it later on, but that was literally it

What Mattis says doesn't challenge anything I've said about the seriousness of the situation. I'm trusting that the missile strike will be as far as it goes because Mattis

Bringing in Mattis and his analysis on the evidence was just a contrast to that podcast, to which both the scholar and host seriously doubt that Assad and RUS had any involvement in the attack and I think passively blamed rebels on doing it for global support etc.

 

[Dak]

it made no sense. "It's worse than the Cuban missile crisis because it might become the Cuban missile crisis" -- that's a ridiculously stupid statement. and that was literally all he went with it. unless he goes back to it later on, but that was literally it

It's worse because the populations are more condensed, weaponry is more lethal, infrastructure is more vulnerable, and the global economy is more interconnected.

Bringing in Mattis and his analysis on the evidence was just a contrast to that podcast, to which both the scholar and host seriously doubt that Assad and RUS had any involvement in the attack and I think passively blamed rebels on doing it for global support etc.

Well Mattis *has* to say what he said, whether it's true or not.

 

[rms]

Well Mattis *has* to say what he said, whether it's true or not.

I really didn't think you were this far off the deep end in relation to Russia. duly noted, I guess.

t's worse because

It can be worse. doubtful. but it isn't worse today. It's a terrible and illogical point to make today.

 

[Dak]

I really didn't think you were this far off the deep end in relation to Russia. duly noted, I guess.

"The deep end". I suppose the history of verified or planned US false flags for war purposes is completely outside of your awareness. Most notable examples:

http://www.history.com/news/the-gulf-of-tonkin-incident-50-years-ago
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Lusitania
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html

Seymour Hersh on prior purported Syrian chemical attacks:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

Obviously Russia engages in similar behavior, but we are talking about the incident in Syria, not comparing the global behavior of the US and Russia.

It can be worse. doubtful. but it isn't worse today. It's a terrible and illogical point to make today.

I supposed you don't acknowledge a punch is coming until after it lands.

 

[rms]

RMS Lusitania

who said we haven't made up or manipulated information to provoke war? Your first instinct is to side with Russian info, not ours, and that is strange.

 

[Dak]

RMS Lusitania

who said we haven't made up or manipulated information to provoke war? Your first instinct is to side with Russian info, not ours, and that is strange.

Because in this case the cui bono indicates that whoever it was that the chemical injuries, it wasn't Assad. Furthermore, the US is playing with fire.

 

[rms]

it wasn't Assad.

nothing to gain by trying to suppress one of his two enemies =/

 

[Dak]

nothing to gain by trying to suppress one of his two enemies =/

Because he has no way to suppress ISIS than by using weapons he knows will A. hurt civilians and B. draw the ire of the "international community"?

 

[rms]

civilians/resistance is an enemy of Assad as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ess-was-not-education/?utm_term=.2b9f0aa489d7

Apparently some guy on the NYMag, Sullivan, wrote an article about how asians are the best ethnic group so now black twitter is mad and shieeeeeeeeeeet

but this article was linked as to oppose the idea that Asian Americans/immigrants depended on immigration. It instead argues that 'white america' got less racist which has to be the most mental gymnastics thing i've read in awhile. maybe you guys will enjoy it too

edit; found the article:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/why-do-democrats-feel-sorry-for-hillary-clinton.html

 

[viewerfromnihil]

civilians/resistance is an enemy of Assad as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ess-was-not-education/?utm_term=.2b9f0aa489d7

Apparently some guy on the NYMag, Sullivan, wrote an article about how asians are the best ethnic group so now black twitter is mad and shieeeeeeeeeeet

but this article was linked as to oppose the idea that Asian Americans/immigrants depended on immigration. It instead argues that 'white america' got less racist which has to be the most mental gymnastics thing i've read in awhile. maybe you guys will enjoy it too

edit; found the article:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/why-do-democrats-feel-sorry-for-hillary-clinton.html

Talk about coming out of left field. I've known Sullivan to be conservative on many issues, but I didn't anticipate him working in a "pull yur pants up!!1" argument against blacks in an article about Hillary Clinton. I don't necessarily disagree with the essence of what he's saying regarding Asian Americans (and Jews, for that matter), but to draw the line of demarcation between the experience of Asian Americans and African Americans as revolving around the nuclear family, an emphasis on the importance of hard work and education, and strong intra-community networks overlooks the vast differences in outside factors which played into those different experiences.

 

[rms]

but to draw the line of demarcation between the experience of Asian Americans and African Americans as revolving around the nuclear family, an emphasis on the importance of hard work and education, and strong intra-community networks overlooks the vast differences in outside factors which played into those different experiences.

yeah, the total non inclusion of environmental factors is ridiculous. then libs respond in the best way possible, asians excelled in american society because "whites got less racist" not asians "beating the white racist system" --

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I think the usual argument is that we only take in doctors, engineers, etc from Asia, whereas most blacks in America are descendants from slaves. Culture, wealth, and intelligence propagate from generation to generation, so it's only natural that Koreans and Japanese in America will be more successful and less discriminated against than blacks on the whole.

 

[CiG]

Bullshit, plenty of poor Asians come to the west in general and flourish or at least reach a level of success and remain static.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

No they don't. The poorest Asians to come here post-WW2, the Hmong, are still the poorest Asians today (roughly Hispanic-tier income levels). The American immigration system explicitly favors those that are already wealthy and/or educated, aside from the illegals but that's a grey area and irrelevant to Asia.

 

[CiG]

Well that's certainly not true of Australia but fair enough I guess I'm wrong.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

That's because the only things Asian-Australians have to compete with are ex-convicts and abos.

 

[CiG]

New Zealanders man, they come here and make tons of money than go home and buy a house or some shit.

 

[CiG]

An attempt at crossing over into the comedy realm or has this guy's moral relativism lead him down the path of being an absolute piece of shit?

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Only an SJW faggot would take offense to what he said. Rising white suicide rates are only really a thing among the most degenerate, heroin-addicted white trash. Who gives a shit?