• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zolo

Member
I just can't imagine living a life where I'm terrorized by things that are basically irrelevant to worry about.

There's a nice park right by my house with a trail that goes through the woods. It's all paved and well taken care of. I enjoy walking this trail every so often. I told my dad I do this and he thought I was crazy and in serious danger because anyone could jump out of the woods at any time and rob me.

The only other people on the trail with me that I've ever seen were the elderly or dudes who take their bike riding way too seriously. If it's safe enough for them...

Maybe I'm too casual with my own personal safety. Meh

Nah. I don't know if its our parents' generation, but a lot of them seem irrationally worried about things that are statistically very unlikely to happen.
 
Nah. I don't know if its our parents' generation, but a lot of them seem irrationally worried about things that are statistically very unlikely to happen.

I'm more likely to be hit by a car crossing the street to get to the park than I am to be jumped by a guy in the bushes, on a cliff, over a fence, at 10am on a Sunday, while on a trail where a dude on a bike could speed pass at any second.

The trail is at least 5 feet off the ground, situated next to a cliff that's probably at a 70 degree angle. There's a 8 foot high fence around the trail. There isn't really any actual way someone could hide in the bushes and attack in broad daylight. The danger seems nearly non-existent, at least during the day. I'd never walk it at night.
 
Tim Murphy resigns October 21st.

DLZlg08WsAA3tk_.jpg
 

Blader

Member
tbh it's probably better if Iran gets a nuke, it will substantially reduce the chance of us going to war with them

It substantially increases the chances of terrorists in the region getting a nuke and particularly increases the chances of countries like Saudi Arabia also becoming a nuclear power.
 

kirblar

Member
We should just choose not to go to war with them and that would reduce the chances too
The lack of context for what happened in '01/'02 re: Afghanistan (harboring terrorists who directly attacked the US) vs Iraq (Invasion plans drawn up by the admin by blue-balled Bush I officials that used 9/11 opportunistically to sell them) is going to be such a problem going forward.
 

DTC

Member
Doesn't Tim Murphy resigning mean we get another democrat in the house since Pennsylvania's governor is a democrat?
 
I think this is right.

@Nate_Cohn
A PA-18 special election isn't totally impossible for Dems. Yes, very Trump-y, but
--registration is D+6 / Dem strength downballot
--specials = uncertainty
--plenty of favorable precedents for Ds in this sort of district/open races post scandal
 
I think this is right.
Yeah. I wouldn’t count on it, but it’s within the realm of possibility.

Even if a lot of those registered Democrats have been voting Republican for a while, sometimes events like these can remind them of why they used to vote Democratic in the first place.

Just don’t make the same mistake Ossoff did and turn it into a national referendum because they’ll lose easily.

Greg Stanton is in for AZ-9 btw. If Stanton and Sinema both win, that’s a big upgrade on each previous office holder. More progressive House member for a progressive district, centrist senator for a red state over a far-right asshole.
 
Don’t think we would go to war with them with how close they are with Russia. Russia is closer to Iran than it is with Syria and you know the extent they are helping Assad.
This is really dumb, I hope you seriously don't think Russia is just dictating every single foreign policy decision we make. At the very least, the people with the power to declare war are overwhelmingly okay with opposing Russia.

It substantially increases the chances of terrorists in the region getting a nuke and particularly increases the chances of countries like Saudi Arabia also becoming a nuclear power.
This is fair, just goes to show how deep the problems America has caused in the region are. Maybe some of those incredibly qualified wonks should consider that when deciding it's time for another regime change.

Or Israel launching a preemptive nuclear strike on Iran
This seems like a compelling argument for the need to impose heavy sanctions on Israel due to the danger they pose to the region until more moderate heads can prevail.

We should just choose not to go to war with them and that would reduce the chances too
I agree! Unfortunately, it seems like the bipartisan thoughtless and destructive foreign policy agendas still dominate both parties and haven't shown much sign of changing, so in lieu of that, Iran should probably look at the examples of other opponents of American interests and see how they have fared based on their capacity to resist.
 

pigeon

Banned
I agree! Unfortunately, it seems like the bipartisan thoughtless and destructive foreign policy agendas still dominate both parties and haven't shown much sign of changing, so in lieu of that, Iran should probably look at the examples of other opponents of American interests and see how they have fared based on their capacity to resist.

I assume Iran has as much information on that as you do and they agreed to the nuclear deal, which I think poses a problem for your analysis.

I think Iran's primary goal here is to avoid war with Israel, which would inevitably be on an uneven basis. The nuclear deal helps pressure Israel to restrain itself and lets Iran move towards normalization.
 

Blader

Member
This is fair, just goes to show how deep the problems America has caused in the region are. Maybe some of those incredibly qualified wonks should consider that when deciding it's time for another regime change.

Okay...that doesn't solve the problem that just letting Iran have a nuke would cause, though.
 
This seems like a compelling argument for the need to impose heavy sanctions on Israel due to the danger they pose to the region until more moderate heads can prevail.

mXyupD1.gif


The only timeline in which the US sanctions Israel is the one where the anti-semitic branch of the alt-right seizes total power.

Even then they probably wouldn't because that's where they'd ship all of the Jewish Americans to.
 
Okay...that doesn't solve the problem that just letting Iran have a nuke would cause, though.
I said "this is fair" because I viewed your analysis as correct, there are large downsides even if the likelihood of war with Iran is greatly reduced as a result, which is arguably still worth the costs.

My broader point was that just being like "wow Trump what a fuckup am I right" on this is that looking at this situation ignores the decades of decisions and policy leading up to this event such that we have to worry about this to begin with. It's correct that Biden, Hillary, or another Democrat would uphold the deal but ignores their role in making such a precarious deal necessary to begin with.

mXyupD1.gif


The only timeline in which the US sanctions Israel is the one where the anti-semitic branch of the alt-right seizes total power.

Even then they probably wouldn't because that's where they'd ship all of the Jewish Americans to.
I didn't say it was likely, only that you made a compelling argument for it.

I also think there are compelling arguments for banning cars but that is similarly politically unlikely.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
Played Cards Against Humanity for first time.

... Don't get it, "lol so random" and bigotry are like 30% of the deck.
It's all about the people you play with. Without having deep history together, it becomes a political ly incorrect/outrageous combo race.
If the recent expansion packs are added in, it leans even more towards meme/politics/bigotry awareness.
 

pigeon

Banned
Okay...that doesn't solve the problem that just letting Iran have a nuke would cause, though.

Wait, I'm actually really unconvinced on the concerns you raise. Iran is, like, a pretty functional country with a strong government. They're not going to just lose nukes. Nor are they likely to hand them out willy-nilly, since they don't actually want to trigger the apocalypse.

It is possible that Iran having nukes will spook Saudi Arabia into nuclear development, but, like, that's a good argument for preventing Israel from developing nukes and it clearly didn't work. That concern strikes me as a little disingenuous. Israel's possession of nuclear weapons and belligerence towards all its neighbors is naturally going to lead to them wanting nukes. Not much that can be done about that.
 
Played Cards Against Humanity for first time.

... Don't get it, "lol so random" and bigotry are like 30% of the deck.
Played that once with a friend and her family and one of my answers triggered my friend’s far right military police officer brother (the type who makes fun of oversensitive liberals for being triggered) so that was cool.

I think the problem with a game like that is it’s pretty easy to cross the line of satire and social commentary to bigotry for the lulz, but I like it. I’ve started filtering out cards in the deck and replacing them with fresh ones from the expansion packs, it gets boring seeing the same unfunny ones come up constantly. They’re doing a Disney expansion soon so I’m pretty psyched for that.
 

chadskin

Member
White House officials believe that chief of staff John Kelly’s personal cell phone was compromised, potentially as long ago as December, according to three U.S. government officials.

The discovery raises concerns that hackers or foreign governments may have had access to data on Kelly’s phone while he was secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and after he joined the West Wing.

Tech support staff discovered the suspected breach after Kelly turned his phone in to White House tech support this summer complaining that it wasn’t working or updating software properly.

Kelly told the staffers the phone hadn’t been working properly for months, according to the officials.

A White House official, speaking for the administration, said Kelly hadn’t used the personal phone often since joining the administration. This person said Kelly relied on his government-issued phone for most communications.

The official, who did not dispute any of POLITICO’s reporting on the timeline of events or the existence of the memo, said Kelly no longer had possession of the device but declined to say where the phone is now.

Kelly has since begun using a different phone, one of the officials said, though he relies on his government phone when he’s inside the White House.

Several government officials said it was unclear when – or where – Kelly’s phone was first compromised. It is unclear what data may have been accessed, if any.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/05/john-kelly-cell-phone-compromised-243514

cool cool cool
 

Valhelm

contribute something
It substantially increases the chances of terrorists in the region getting a nuke and particularly increases the chances of countries like Saudi Arabia also becoming a nuclear power.

Pakistan already has nukes, and they're much more vulnerable to this kind of nightmare scenario than Iran. Because the overwhelming majority of Muslim terrorist orgs are Sunni, they hate the Shia Irans for having the audacity to exist. It would be much harder for these sorts of people to infiltrate Iran than Pakistan, a Sunni Muslim that has a lot of very nasty dealings with terrorist groups and hosts a growing extremist population.

But you're 100% correct that Iran going nuclear accelerates the Mideast cold war. Best possible outcome is that a more compassionate and less blatantly imperialistic administration pivots away from Saudi Arabia and stops funding movements to overthrow Iran's allies. These gestures would assure Iran that nukes aren't needed.
 

pigeon

Banned
But you're 100% correct that Iran going nuclear accelerates the Mideast cold war. Best possible outcome is that a more compassionate and less blatantly imperialistic administration pivots away from Saudi Arabia and stops funding movements to overthrow Iran's allies. These gestures would assure Iran that nukes aren't needed.

No they wouldn't. Israel is still right there! I don't think this is a correct understanding of Iran's concerns at all. In case you forgot, they already agreed to stop developing nuclear weapons as part of the deal. That's the whole deal!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom