US Politics Thread

[brokenshoelace]

A 12 year old girl has died in Belgium. A 13 year old boy died in England. Neither had any pre-existing conditions.

Take this virus seriously.

And if a certain black humorist/gigolo wants to claim that's too small of a sample, remember that before you call something "evidence."

 

[britbox]

FYI Cali. Alarmist, Hysterical?

The relevance is that in both cases you have been hysterical. And no, you never answered the first question. You simply said that Trump would not be able to put the genie back in the bottle, implying that some sort of chaotic and irreparable situation was being created in the Middle East. So that's why I am asking you to clarify. Apparently you don't want to clarify because you don't want to admit that you were being overly emotional - although to your credit, you did not say anything as stupid as Federberg predicting a slew of international assassinations. (He clearly can't forgive me for pointing out that he said that because it makes him look ridiculous.)

Try again... I'm not sure what your definition of hysteria is...

The immediate fallout is over. Remind me what doomsday scenario I predicted? Good luck with that. I said it was a clusterfuck move. A huge one.

Were you expecting Iranians to put a fleet together and try to invade California? Me neither. I was expecting a bigger immediate response than they gave, which I admitted afterward.

What you fail to see, it that this isn't "over" - it's ongoing. Iran has proxies all around the world that can damage US interests, not to mention cyberattacks and a multitude of other ways of hurting the US.

You might recall the PanAm Lockerbie strike many years ago? The US blamed Libya, but everyone knows they were the junior partner in the exercise. It was Iranian revenge for you blowing one of their civilian flights out of the sky. The casualties were actually almost the same. You won't have heard of the original strike, because it was hardly reported in the western media.

But here is the thing... it didn't happen the day after.

As for being "hysterical" about this virus...

Nobody is saying everybody should be "dropping dead like flies". As Junior Soprano said "We're not making a Western here"... what we're saying here is that it's epidemic contagion with above-average death rates.

When talking about data models...

First of all, I do not think there will be anything like that number because they are trying to mitigate the risk (+ it's a worst-case scenario). The real number will likely end up being far less.

The aim is to spread the rate of contagion out over a longer period, so they have a better chance of being able to treat more critical cases, bringing the death rate down significantly. i.e. They don't want everybody (the high-risk element) to become infected at once. It's called flattening the curve. Otherwise health services will get overrun and more people die because they can't get treatment.

However, if governments follow your line of thinking and just laugh this off, then you'll end up with a far more serious problem on your hands.

More crazy "hysteria" and alarmism...

I don't think anybody on this thread or with an ounce of common sense doesn't agree that the vast majority of people will be fine.

Neither, do I think anybody contributing to this thread think they are in immediate danger. Just a guess, no evidence.

From my experience, ordinary masses aren't that scared about their own wellbeing either... but they do care for the wellbeing of others.

Just sheer madness...

When everything comes out in the wash, the death rate will likely be lower than 1%. A few things need to be factored in. For instance, in most countries, people couldn't get tests if they had mild symptoms. There was also an inadequate number of testing kits available.

What's your definition of hysteria, again?

A reminder on this thread: as of this time, there are a paltry 33 deaths in the U.S. and 1,000 cases reported. That is absolutely nothing compared to what prior pandemics have caused. The coronavirus has a long way to go to even reach their level.

^Talk about a post that didn't age well...

^ Jeez. This is like trying to explain the colour of the sky to a blind man.

One last time... the paltry figures won't remain paltry for long. It's the exponential growth numbers that should be thing you're looking at.

 

[calitennis127]

Trump called it a hoax. The results are telling. But he won't be criticized for that by his cult followers because A) they don't give a shit about how he actually performs and B) standards are already as low as they can possibly be. Of course, he also disbanded the whole pandemic team in 2018 but you won't hear his minions criticize him.

Just a reminder that the Lebanese Elmer Fudd still has not acknowledged that both of the statements above were completely false and have been disproven by multiple news stories. It's funny how when he gets something blatantly wrong and gets refuted he acts like it never happened.

All links were provided in prior posts to demonstrate that each of those completely mindless anti-Trump statements were completely incorrect.

 

[calitennis127]

And if a certain black humorist/gigolo wants to claim that's too small of a sample, remember that before you call something "evidence."

Hey, little dumbfuck with a mental impediment, besides the specific examples of hydroxychloroquine working in Florida, New Jersey, and Michigan, I also cited the example of a doctor in New York City effectively treating over 600 patients, plus two French studies arguing that the drug was effective, plus the recent FDA approval.

Now either 1) you're being blatantly dishonest and omitting that info, or 2) you have memory issues in processing a high degree of information, or 3) you are just being a lazy turd. With you we know the likely answers are 2 and 3.

 

[calitennis127]

Just a reminder that over the past month alone we have learned that Cali is a true vanilla faced, black at heart, bible reading, history knowing, red, white and blue cool-aid drinking, democracy championing, genocide justifying, 10/10 ladies pleasuring, medical expert.

Because Bwoken clearly is a mental defective with struggles in memory processing, information integration, and most of all attention span, I will keep the retorts short and simple (so he can follow them):

1) I have consistently opposed every U.S. intervention in the Middle East since 2003. That is the opposite of Kool-Aid drinking.

2) Your own laziness shows in the fact that you don't even know I absolutely detest the idea of spreading democracy or democratic ideals internationally. I oppose the idea. However, I am aware that it was the moral justification provided for the war in Iraq and remains the justification for U.S. intervention in many quarters.

3) While I have disagreed with the U.S. interventions in the Middle East, calling them "genocide" is utterly preposterous. The standard definition of genocide is an explicit intent to kill a certain group of people. Let's go with this official definition: "the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group."

You can say that the U.S. killed civilians in Iraq. But to say that what the United States was doing was explicitly trying to kill Muslims or Iraqis or Sunnis simply on the basis of their identity is utterly preposterous. It is an indefensible position. There is no evidence for it. So either the Lebanese Elmer is deliberately misusing the term "genocide" for effect or he does not know what it means (or he is simply being lazy, which it becomes clearer by the day that he is).

he is a a medical expert of the highest order who with each passing day, is proven as wrong as his orange president is,

For the one-millionth time, Trump has been repeating the renowned Dr. Fauci's statements at almost every turn, going back to early February. And Trump was talking about the coronavirus as a problem before others were. He enacted a travel ban in late January and mentioned it in the State of the Union Address in early February. Democrats called him xenophobic for the travel ban on people who had been to China recently and numerous leading Democrats (most notably Pelosi and De Blasio) told people in major urban areas to go out and live their lives normally.

As always, you are a low-information tool with your facts wrong.

but somehow keeps yelling louder, the same way he does after every major that Nadal wins.

Lol.....this is the same guy who repeats my arguments about strategy against Nadal from 2011 and 2012 and then acts like he was saying them all along. Sure, stupid boy. Sure.

 

[calitennis127]

Like I have said a million times, you are a complete fucking dumbass. Your arrogance in thinking you have the United States all figured out is simply a cover for your total ignorance about the United States. You don't even know who the basic players are in American foreign policy and what their worldview is.

Another problem here is that you think the only ideas that can motivate someone to do something destructive are traditional religious ones. The possibility of a secular ideology (such as "global democracy") inspiring people to kill with the intention of improving humanity is something that your ignorant ass knows nothing about.

Let's take Christopher Hitchens.....murat and I talked about this a few years ago. He was one of the West's most outspoken atheists and he hated Christianity. But he supported the war in Iraq because he wanted to use it to secularize the Middle East. The main architects of the war in Iraq believed in his vision fully.

Now, of course, you are going to make the case that the U.S. power elite secretly engaged in war on Iraq to gain wealth and power in the Middle East, but if that was strictly their motive, then the mission in Afghanistan would make no sense. The U.S. has lost far more wealth there than it could ever gain.



Being a "laughing stock" to you simply means being right. You are a complete tool and a low-information ignoramus. I have said this dozens of times.

You use a term like "genocidal war ideology" to sound sophisticated, but no one here except myself calls you out for using such an asinine phrase and also for failing to justify it. To date you still have not named a single foreign policy theorist or figure who has written a book or policy paper that justifies this "genocidal war ideology."

I, on the other hand, could cite numerous documents produced by neoconservative ideologues who believe in an ideal of global democracy and have advocated it. You don't know anything about that and simply settle for your boneheaded generalizations about American foreign policy. As I have said numerous times, you are a complete joke and ignoramus who knows nothing - the Lebanese Elmer Fudd, BwokenWooWace.

A reminder here that despite taking the time to type 4 replies recently, the Lebanese Elmer Fudd could not respond to anything in the above post about the United States's supposed "genocidal war ideology."

- I mention that secular democracy was the moral justification for the war in Iraq (which it was), and somehow he accuses me of espousing democracy (this is the guy who accuses me of engaging in non sequiturs). Even though I have said dozens of times that I oppose the idea of spreading democracy in the Middle East, I am somehow now espousing it because I simply said that the Iraq war architects believed in it. Fantastic logic there. Fantastic.

- I mention Christopher Hitchens being a leading atheist and supporting the war in Iraq, and Bwoken says nothing to that.

- I ask him to define "genocidal war ideology" and name some of its proponents, and he offers nothing. Not a single name of a foreign policy figure, not a single book, not a single article. Nor does he explain how the United States was "genocidal."

As I have said numerous times, Bwoken is a low-information tool who stereotypes the United States in the most ignorant way possible. He also knows nothing about any right-wing thought or the diversity within it.

 

[calitennis127]

To Britbox: I am not saying that you have been totally imbalanced. You have made some measured statements, and you quoted those above. When I say that you have been hysterical, I mean that you have agreed at every step with the widespread economic shutdowns with little regard for anything except the worst possible projections of what the virus can do.

I would go into more detail, but I'd rather just allow everyone to be mesmerized at the level of ignorance and sloppiness on the part of the simpleton in Lebanon, who somehow accused me of being an espouser of democracy spreading and accused the United States of being genocidal. Lol. What a fucking idiot. That kind of stupidity deserves to be recognized with deep reverence and awe because you can't find it too often anywhere.

 

[britbox]

To Britbox: I am not saying that you have been totally imbalanced. You have made some measured statements, and you quoted those above. When I say that you have been hysterical, I mean that you have agreed at every step with the widespread economic shutdowns with little regard for anything except the worst possible projections of what the virus can do.

I would go into more detail, but I'd rather just allow everyone to be mesmerized at the level of ignorance and sloppiness on the part of the simpleton in Lebanon, who somehow accused me of being an espouser of democracy accusing the United States of being genocidal. Lol. What a fucking idiot. That kind of stupidity deserves to be recognized with deep reverence and awe because you can't find it too often anywhere.

I'm in favour of short term economic shutdowns to get a grip on the situation. I know there is a valid argument against it, but you'll never sell it to the public. And the contagion without intervention would eventually demand draconian action in any event. Lance the boil before it gets even worse out of control.

 

[calitennis127]

I'm in favour of short term economic shutdowns to get a grip on the situation.

I understand that, but we simply disagree on how extensive they need to be in all cases.

 

[britbox]

I understand that, but we simply disagree on how extensive they need to be in all cases.

Well, some of this shit doesn't quite add up for me either. But, for now, at least, I'll ride the governmental expert opinion. Either something way bigger is in motion, or it is what it is. If it is what it's supposed to be, then I'll ride it out for a couple of months. If people start talking seriously about 18-month lockdowns, then it's a new ball game.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Favorite part of this thread is Cali thinking that his Trump-esque gradually back-tracking act is lost on anyone.

 

[calitennis127]

Favorite part of this thread is Cali thinking that his Trump-esque gradually back-tracking act is lost on anyone.

There was no backtracking, dipshit. I have been consistent from Day 1 that these economic shutdowns are excessive and I still believe that. But thanks again for demonstrating your knowledge of American foreign policy.

After numerous posts asking for him to demonstrate the slightest knowledge of who is who in American foreign policy, still none of the following from the Lebanese Elmer Fudd:

- Not a single foreign policy figure named
- Not a single book or policy paper espousing American foreign policy ideas, let alone "genocidal war ideology"
- Not a single comment on the West's most rabid atheist and secularist in the last 30 years (Christopher Hitchens) supporting the war in Iraq
- Not a single attempt at explaining how the U.S. attempted a genocide in Iraq

Also no acknowledgment that his quote about Trump calling the virus a hoax and disbanding the pandemic team was completely inaccurate.

 

[Federberg]

When I look at what Benny Gantz did in Israel, stepping aside for the national good, in the face of the pandemic. I shake my head at Bernie. He is not a leader, he is an ambitious politician who is not big enough for the moment. We've gone past the point that one can make the argument that it's necessary for him to prolong the race in order to promote his policies. This is just self serving, and plays into Trump's hands imho...

 

[calitennis127]

When I look at what Benny Gantz did in Israel, stepping aside for the national good, in the face of the pandemic.

You should also know that Trump donated his quarterly salary to fighting the pandemic. One of the idiots who writes for Vox tried to downplay it but we all know what would be said about a Democratic president making such a donation during these circumstances. We would hear that his holiness and nobility were indescribable.

 

[Federberg]

You should also know that Trump donated his quarterly salary to fighting the pandemic. One of the idiots who writes for Vox tried to downplay it but we all know what would be said about a Democratic president making such a donation during these circumstances. We would hear that his holiness and nobility was indescribable.

That would look more impressive though if he wasn't profiting from his Presidency so blatantly though mate. Don't forget the military being diverted to his resort in Scotland. The shenanigans at Mar a Lago and other Trump properties. It's a drop in the ocean mate

 

[calitennis127]

That would look more impressive though if he wasn't profiting from his Presidency so blatantly though mate. Don't forget the military being diverted to his resort in Scotland. The shenanigans at Mar a Lago and other Trump properties. It's a drop in the ocean mate

But what did you expect him to do when he became president? Impose a self-inflicted shutdown on all of his companies to be morally pure? I can't imagine anyone doing that. Do you think Bloomberg or Steyer would have done that if they were elected?

There is no comparison between Trump wanting his businesses to stay afloat and Hillary making $300 million strictly by leveraging her government service. I'm not sure where this argument with Trump goes. You are holding him to the most angelic standard imaginable. If you had dozens of businesses and got elected president, would you expect yourself to shut down every business you had built in order to meet some pure ideal of moral perfection? It's hard to see anyone doing that.

 

[Federberg]

But what did you expect him to do when he became president? Impose a self-inflicted shutdown on all of his companies to be morally pure? I can't imagine anyone doing that. Do you think Bloomberg or Steyer would have done that if they were elected?

There is no comparison between Trump wanting his businesses to stay afloat and Hillary making $300 million strictly by leveraging her government service. I'm not sure where this argument with Trump goes. You are holding him to the most angelic standard imaginable. If you had dozens of businesses and got elected president, would you expect yourself to shut down every business you had built in order to meet some pure ideal of moral perfection? It's hard to see anyone doing that.

I certainly appreciate the difficulty, but it's possible to set up Trusts. But I'm not even bothered by that. It's what we see with government officials using his resorts and such. This is the sort of stuff we all used to shake our heads at when we saw it in developing countries. When did this become acceptable in America? As for Clinton, it's filthy, I'm not going to say it isn't. We're all a bit disgusted with Tony Blair over here. Same thing. But Clinton wasn't on the job when she was doing that mate. And she wasn't President. It's not quite the same

 

[britbox]

I disagree with Hillary Clinton. She leveraged her presidential campaign to new heights when it came to donors. Money was flooding into her charity from the middle east particularly. That same charity with a huge focus on empowering women was getting millions from Saudi Arabia. You couldn't make it up.

Let's be honest, they all leverage their positions. It's not like Biden's son got where he was on merit.

 

[Federberg]

I disagree with Hillary Clinton. She leveraged her presidential campaign to new heights when it came to donors. Money was flooding into her charity from the middle east particularly. That same charity with a huge focus on empowering women was getting millions from Saudi Arabia. You couldn't make it up.

Let's be honest, they all leverage their positions. It's not like Biden's son got where he was on merit.

let's stipulate that they're all a little bit dodgy. Heck we can look at Mark Thatcher. How did he become some sort of Arms Trader? The man is/was worth £0.5bn!! We all know mummy had something to do with it. But let's not equate that with a sitting President letting government officials use his product. This is a level of blatant corruption that would make an Indonesian President blush. I can't believe it's happening in the US of A and it's not front page news everyday

 

[britbox]

let's stipulate that they're all a little bit dodgy. Heck we can look at Mark Thatcher. How did he become some sort of Arms Trader? The man is/was worth £0.5bn!! We all know mummy had something to do with it. But let's not equate that with a sitting President letting government officials use his product. This is a level of blatant corruption that would make an Indonesian President blush. I can't believe it's happening in the US of A and it's not front page news everyday

Mark Thatcher... LOL! Do you remember when the British Government rescued him from Africa at taxpayers' expense? "Sir Mark Thatcher"... a knight of the realm, kind of funny when Midge Ure can't even get a knighthood.

I think you're stretching with Trump pal... he doesn't have as many lobby groups to entertain. Let's not pretend Biden's sudden influx of donors comes without conditions... or Clintons previously. Trump probably has fewer favours to meet than any Presidents since Jimmy Carter. That's not to say he won't leverage his position... but that's nothing new.