Obama re-elected as President of the USA

[QuantaCat]

They do that every ten years. It's a long-planned changing of the guard, and any efforts to shake things up go badly for those who try: Case in point, Bo Xilai.

OK, good, still, I hope the "new guard" dont fuck it up. Because I get the feeling that they have more sway on "real" world politics and events than the US does, currently.

[Nalano]

OK, good, still, I hope the "new guard" dont fuck it up. Because I get the feeling that they have more sway on "real" world politics and events than the US does, currently.

From what I read, Wen Jiabao is fairly liberal by CCP standards, and has done a great deal during his career to not be viewed as de facto royalty.

[Hypernetic]

Nalano, why are you hanging to a minor point of my message - that the main theme of one of the 3 presidential debates was foreign policy - to try to invalidate the whole argument? I had higher hopes of this conversation from the way it started.

And my main point is not that the American people are ill-informed. I hope that's not the impression I'm causing.

Hypernetic, nope, I'm not supporting any 9/11 nutter conspiracy theory*. But surely you can realize that the American government at the time could - and did - capitalize on the disaster to further their agenda? They don't need to have had any direct involvement with it to leverage the aftermath for political gain.

It's much more than just two issues into one. I'm talking about the consequences of 8 years with a fear-mongering party in power. The few examples I'm giving shouldn't be taken as separate cases, but symptoms of a culture of fear that has held American politics back for way too long.

* Whether 9/11 could have been prevented if the government at the time had acted more appropriately on the information they had is debatable. But I don't think it warrants theories that they deliberately fumbled national defense to create such a disaster. They do exist, though.

What agenda? You sound like a typical conspiracy theory crackpot to me.

[QuantaCat]

From what I read, Wen Jiabao is fairly liberal by CCP standards, and has done a great deal during his career to not be viewed as de facto royalty.

Thing is though, I dont know if liberal is a good thing in China the way it is right now. It all depends on if he is willing to make the changes necessary for his people.

[Nalano]

Thing is though, I dont know if liberal is a good thing in China the way it is right now. It all depends on if he is willing to make the changes necessary for his people.

Thing about a massive 25 year endeavor to raise the largest middle class in the world is, they kinda want a less corrupt, more democratic government when they get there. Hence, liberal is good.

[Maknol]

What agenda? You sound like a typical conspiracy theory crackpot to me.

Not true. In fact, I have only spoken against the conspiracy theory crackpots so far.

What is the agenda of any political party that is in power? To remain in power, and to increase their reach while in power. I've given several examples in this thread. Along with power comes profit - and even if the people as a whole suffer psychologically and economically from the war, individuals find ways to derive personal gain.

This is no conspiracy, there is no secret evil mastermind pulling the strings. It's politics and selfishness on an individual level.

[Hypernetic]

Not true. In fact, I have only spoken against the conspiracy theory crackpots so far.

What is the agenda of any political party that is in power? To remain in power, and to increase their reach while in power. I've given several examples in this thread. Along with power comes profit - and even if the people as a whole suffer psychologically and economically from the war, individuals find ways to derive personal gain.

This is no conspiracy, there is no secret evil mastermind pulling the strings. It's politics and selfishness on an individual level.

You are going to have to provide a lot of facts and evidence to back up this claim, otherwise I'm just going to assume you read this on some dude's blog and think it's true.

[Maknol]

I don't feel like doing so. Providing facts and citations to prove a statement as obvious as "war is a profitable business" doesn't seem like a useful way to pass my time, when all I'm getting out of this exchange are single sentence dismissive answers.

You're free to think what you will, it's no skin off my nose.

[Nalano]

I don't feel like doing so. Providing facts and citations to prove a statement as obvious as "war is a profitable business" doesn't seem like a useful way to pass my time. You're free to think what you will.

Your statement is far more reaching than "war is a profitable business*."

Your statement is "a representative democratic government is impossible because there can be no such thing as a peaceful transfer of power as the rewards of avarice are too great, and as such both political parties are equally corrupt if not in cahoots and the democratic process is pointless." And that is demonstrably untrue.

*for certain contractors

[Maknol]

No, I don't think such a government is impossible - I do, wholeheartedly, think it has its fair share of flaws. This is also an obvious statement that I feel doesn't need any further explanation to convince anyone.

Unfortunately, I don't know of a better option in the real world. That's why I feel it's productive to discuss these problems and, maybe, reflect on how the system could be improved. Yes, I do think both parties are corrupt - not equally, and not totally, but yes, both.

Just like basically any other political institution in the world.

Humans are very flawed beings, there's no point in idealizing those in power. But that doesn't mean the democratic process is pointless. It has many limitations - the two-party dichotomy in the USA, for starters, doesn't help, the political attack ads are a disgrace, the way corporate money seeps into the campaigns and attaches strings to the candidates for the next four years - but it's still the best system we've got, methinks.

[Nalano]

No, I don't think such a government is impossible - I do, wholeheartedly, think it has its fair share of flaws. This is also an obvious statement that I feel doesn't need any further explanation to convince anyone.

Unfortunately, I don't know of a better option in the real world. That's why I feel it's productive to discuss these problems and, maybe, reflect on how the system could be improved. Yes, I do think both parties are corrupt - not equally, and not totally, but yes, both.

Just like basically any other political institution in the world.

Humans are very flawed beings, there's no point in idealizing those in power. But that doesn't mean the democratic process is pointless. It has many limitations - the two-party dichotomy in the USA, for starters, doesn't help, the political attack ads are a disgrace, the way corporate money seeps into the campaigns and attaches strings to the candidates for the next four years - but it's still the best system we've got, methinks.

Then, if I may ask - and I mean this entirely without malice - what the fuck's your problem? Who has been idealizing anything here? To be a real snob and quote Voltaire, "the perfect is the enemy of the good."

[Maknol]

I didn't mean to imply that anyone here idealizes politicians. But I pointed out that corruption and selfishness permeate the political system because those are inherent human traits. Adding that denying that fact would equate to idealizing the politicians themselves.

I felt you misrepresented my point in that quote, I'm expanding and trying to clarify it... I don't think I have a 'problem', per se, but I don't have a grand point I'm trying to prove, either. I'm just sharing my viewpoint on a variety of subjects as the conversation develops - you're free to ignore them if you want, I just don't see any reason for such a defensive stance.

[Kadayi]

Anyway with this financial event looming what are our US RPSrs thoughts on how that's going to play out? Do you think the Republicans are going to be all stuck in the muds like they were last time on the taxes issue until the very last minute? Or do you think they're going to concede some ground so people don't view them as completely unreasonable?

[DiamondDog]

You are going to have to provide a lot of facts and evidence to back up this claim, otherwise I'm just going to assume you read this on some dude's blog and think it's true.

To be honest I could easily level that at everything you've said so far. Might be unfair, but you haven't provided evidence for anything.

[Hypernetic]

To be honest I could easily level that at everything you've said so far. Might be unfair, but you haven't provided evidence for anything.

Do it. Find some things I've said in this thread other than "most people don't even know we are still at war" that you can't verify with a two second google search.

Have fun.

Anyway with this financial event looming what are our US RPSrs thoughts on how that's going to play out? Do you think the Republicans are going to be all stuck in the muds like they were last time on the taxes issue until the very last minute? Or do you think they're going to concede some ground so people don't view them as completely unreasonable?

Sticks in the mud.

[DiamondDog]

verify with a two second google search.

So why can't you do that?

[Hypernetic]

So why can't you do that?

Because I am stating very basic facts and he is insinuating a massive conspiracy between the two major US political parties and various corporations that spans decades, multiple wars, and the 9/11 terrorist attacks?

[Shane]

From what I read, Wen Jiabao is fairly liberal by CCP standards, and has done a great deal during his career to not be viewed as de facto royalty.

Maybe he was too busy helping his family accrue billions to be oppressing people as well.

... and as such both political parties are equally corrupt if not in cahoots and the democratic process is pointless." And that is demonstrably untrue.

You can't expect politicians who collect millions of dollars in donations from corporations to fight elections and come into power to have charity in their hearts towards the general public. In any democracy, especially the American one with its broken systems of lobbying and donations, you can't trust those elected to not pursue their vested interests.

*for certain contractors

The Iraq War was primarily waged to gain control of the country's oil fields, and then provide American MNCs with contracts so that they could profiteer. Definitely more organizations than just certain contractors made hay there.

[QuantaCat]

the US needs a eurogamer style take on politicians: if youre personally involved, you cant be a politician.

[Grizzly]

So why can't you do that?

It is called the Burden of Proof: He who makes the statements should provide his own evidence.

This incident and this incident have strong resemblances to a USS Maine event (or, for a 20th century example, a Marco Polo Bridge event), and Turkey has been requesting American action when it comes to Syria.

Why does the F4 Phantom shit sound like a false flag operation? Because F4 Phantoms are not in active service in Turkey. Their main air force are F16s, and F16s can't be shot down by the aging Cold War era shit that Syria have for their anti-aircraft batteries.

F4 Phantoms are still active in Turkey - "The military said the operation includes commandos, Special Forces and paramilitary Special Forces. They are being reinforced by F-16 and F-4 warplanes, Super Cobra helicopter gunships and surveillance drones."

I am also quite sure that the Turkish F-4 planes have the same missile defences as the F-16 have, as those planes can be upgraded. The F-16 can actually be shot down by cold war defenses (This happened in Serbia) The F-117A has been shot down by aging cold war defenses in Serbia.

As for the Mortar Strike - This happened in Korea as well (Remember that Artillery and the "This is not Starcraft" thing?) - I am quite sure that South Korea does not want open war - They retialited to show that they are not to be trifled with.