1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna
argumate

mrpku asked:

Why are you so sure airstrikes in Syria are bad? I personally don't like them either, but I can see the logic - that threatening to hit anyone who crosses a line may make Assad/ISIS wary of crossing that line - and while I don't *think* that works that well (e.g. Libya), I also think Hillary Clinton knows more than me about geopolitics and wouldn't be very confident about disagreeing with her.

theunitofcaring answered:

See, that’s the whole thing: every single time we’re contemplating an entanglement in the Middle East, it looks like there’s a humanitarian justification and a really good reason. I supported involvement in Libya, because it looked like a clear-cut case where a little involvement could do a lot of good. And instead what happened is that Libya is in an unstable state of ongoing conflict and much worse off than before. This happens every time. I no longer trust ‘I can see the logic”. Even when I can see the logic, this happens. Even when I find the logic really convincing, this happens. 

Every time we bomb places in the Middle East without a long term plan, it ends up worse than if we had just not done that. Every time. When do we just internalize the lesson ‘don’t bomb places hoping it’ll make things better, even when you have a good reason?’ Because that’s the lesson it’ll take to end the foreign interventions.

I think Clinton values the lives of people in poor countries less than me; she might be rational given her goals. Though she was an architect of the Libya mess, so maybe she’s not even that.

Source: theunitofcaring politics
argumate
argumate

The “war is good for the economy” meme just won’t die, even among people who should know better.

mitigatedchaos

All we need to do is blow up Europe again, and also China and Japan and every other country with significant industrial capacity, and we’ll be good to go for another two or three decades.

argumate

I can actually see a possible argument here:

“War destroys an enormous amount of value in the form of lives wasted, resources burned, and infrastructure destroyed, but it can also break a political deadlock and allow reallocation of production within the economy that leads to increased efficiency after the war, as well as smoothing the way for redistribution programs to ex-soldiers that reduce inequality and boost demand.”

Like, maybe? But the fuckin’ annoying thing is that killing a few million people and sending millions of tons of shipping to the bottom of the Atlantic is a very indirect way of passing legislation and it would be nice to just do it directly.

mitigatedchaos

Actually I meant that America was one of the very few countries with significant industrial capacity that had not been hit by strategic bombing campaigns reducing major cities to rubble.  As such, it had a major competitive advantage in the aftermath of the war.  

Most of the rival countries destroyed were already economically developed beforehand, so the survivors were able to reconstruct their advanced economies, which represented monumental growth - but only relative to the conditions caused by the war.

politics the invisible fist
kontextmaschine
kontextmaschine

it’s just two-dimensional chess, played for position

mitigatedchaos

This makes sense if you assume the goal was to establish the credibility of future military threats, which is reasonable 2D international relations chess.  Previous Trump strategies (gambits?) have involved relatively extreme opening offers followed by negotiating down to something more in line with the original plan.

politics trump cw
collapsedsquid
fox43.com

Statement from Pentagon Spokesman Capt. Jeff Davis on U.S. strike in Syria
collapsedsquid

Russian forces were notified in advance of the strike using the established deconfliction line.  U.S. military planners took precautions to minimize risk to Russian or Syrian personnel located at the airfield.

We are assessing the results of the strike.  Initial indications are that this strike has severely damaged or destroyed Syrian aircraft and support infrastructure and equipment at Shayrat Airfield, reducing the Syrian Government’s ability to deliver chemical weapons.  The use of chemical weapons against innocent people will not be tolerated.

mitigatedchaos

Hmn…

In her first interview since her stunning presidential election defeat by Republican rival Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton on Thursday called for the United States to bomb Syrian air fields.

…

Asked whether she now believes that failing to take a tougher stand against Syria was her worst foreign policy mistake as secretary of state under President Barack Obama, Clinton said she favored more aggressive action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“I think we should have been more willing to confront Assad,” Clinton said in the interview, conducted by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof.

“I really believe we should have and still should take out his air fields and prevent him from being able to use them to bomb innocent people and drop sarin gas on them.”

Clinton noted that she had advocated for a no-fly zone in Syria after leaving government, something that Obama opposed.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-hillary-clinton-idUSKBN179058

So, which timeline doesn’t result in this attack?  And did we perhaps luck out on this one, in that Trump merely picked vehicles located at only one facility to strike?

Although based on Russian reactions my temporary spike in estimated risk of nuclear war has subsided.

trump cw politics
bambamramfan

Liberals who aren’t liberal enough

mitigatedchaos

<various posts>

<bambamramfan discussing lackluster enthusiasm among people for Liberalism vs harder ideologies>

I think part of the challenge here is that Liberalism has to ignore certain truths, which, like the careful balance of an immune system, is okay when an animal is healthy, but becomes a serious problem when it becomes unhealthy.  So yes, there are ideological contradictions, but those only come out when the system is under stress.

Genes matter.  Even just the difference in lactose tolerance can make a difference in some cases (though not much in the developed world), even if the other stuff is heavily confounded and is probably more driven by the environment than by genetics.  

Culture matters.  Not everything that is bad is outside the realm of culture.  FGM is cultural.  Cultural tolerance as a virtue is cultural.

Religion matters.  The content of the instructions in a religion has an effect on the behavior of religious adherents, much like the content of the Communist Manifesto has an effect on the behavior of Communists.

Atomic Individualism is not what humans are “designed” for.  We actually have to live in societies and cannot all hole up into libertarian autarchic fortresses which are immune to changes in the broader society’s culture and ideology.

When the various groups under Liberalism are sufficiently close, this can all be glossed over, and generally is in order to suppress racism, xenophobia, and so on.  The typical example of violence driven by fighting about genes/culture/religion attacks someone who hasn’t done anything personally.

However, the same ideological tools used to suppress this bad behavior also prevent dealing with larger risks that loom on the horizon.  You cannot have someone saying “Liberalism, except for Islam” - though I’ve seen someone say it quietly - even though the rise of various Ethnonationalists and Nationalists in Europe would probably not be happening if Europe had taken this stance.

Source: onecornerface ideology liberalism politics
mitoticcephalopod
mitoticcephalopod

honestly if you call trump anything other than his actual name I immediately start discounting your opinion no matter how much I otherwise agree with you.
calling him “drumpf” or “45” or whatever other bullshit you’ve come up with doesn’t like, hurt the trump brand or hurt his feelings in any meaningful way. you’re just being an idiot.

mitigatedchaos

Orange Capitalism Man. The Orange Man. Our First Meme-American President.

- neutral on Trump, calls him other things so left/libs panicking he’ll become the next Fuhrer don’t immediately stop listening

politics trump cw
Top Photos