Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Starver]

Yeah, imma gonna assume that Cheesy is just looking to make this thread even more buggy, jump-to-last-post-wise, as a whole swathe of deliberate shitposting is edited out (probably including some good points that are intertwined, but our brave reactionary doesn't care one jot about).

It's not big and it's not clever. Have some courage to properly discuss these things without throwing around barely-bowdlerised epithets just for shitz'n'gigglez.

[hector13]

I never knew so many strawmen could appear in one argument from two people.

I also expected the thread to get locked from election stuff, rather than... whatever that was.

[delphonso]

Same, hector.

Ahh, Ameripol. Never change. <3

[dragdeler]

-

[Cheesy Honkers]

Let's see.  It is estimated in 2020 that around 2,000 ISIS fighters remain in Iraq.  The Iraqi armed forces have 193,000 active personnel.  Does that seem like an even split to you?

The problem is they don't know where the 2,000 ISIS fighters are, so the 193k have to be spread around the country to try and cover as many bases as possible. Plus, they're not just dealing with ISIS, but also incursions from Turkey

True, true, but involving the US armed forces is not helping anyone. The Iraqi government demanded that American troops leave, to no response. The US has no right to deploy its military against another country, so what is there to debate?

Yeah, imma gonna assume that Cheesy is just looking to make this thread even more buggy, jump-to-last-post-wise, as a whole swathe of deliberate shitposting is edited out (probably including some good points that are intertwined, but our brave reactionary doesn't care one jot about).

It's not big and it's not clever. Have some courage to properly discuss these things without throwing around barely-bowdlerised epithets just for shitz'n'gigglez.

Man I didn't expect that the statement "self defence is a moral right" to be so controversial. Maybe you're right, maybe we do have to whip out the drawn out debates to determine whether invading a country and occupying it for 17 years to exploit its resources is an immoral action.

Spoiler: dismiss the project for a new american century as some whacky conspiracy if you will, that won't change the minds in the middle east (click to show/hide)

Could you label the map as to make it more clear? Thanks in advance

[hector13]

There’s no issue with you having a reasoned discussion. The issue is being an ass and personal attacks that have little to do with the topic being discussed.

Same goes for ZBridges to be fair. If y’all can’t have an argument without resorting to insults, go to elsewhere, plis.

[Cheesy Honkers]

Tbh I came here to shitpost and slander, now I shall return to the Lurk

Farewell for forever, I suppose

[Starver]

(Though I see the point of the map, there'll be a degree of "we have bases everwhere, just for general power-projection, except where we don't have bases which will then look like holes in our map that we surround". By that logic, the RAF is poised to attack Birmingham (UK) and the Black Country (likewise, and sounds worse than it is).  That's without then someone (perhaps local) recognising that this particular hole in the map-of-not-anti-US states might have at least an anti-not-anti-US-states state and and ask that further US presence be preferentially be placed more adjacent to that hole than otherwise might have been. And, given such invitations, it would be against all reason to blithely turn them down, though it does then perpetuate and reinforce the pressures that create such holes and surrounds.  -  What I'm saying is that it is perhaps a seeded 'chance' thing that grows into statistical significance but without actual malice-aforethought. Not that there isn't enough malice-aforethought already there, of course.)

[dragdeler]

-

[Doomblade187]

With some luck Iran could have been a super progressive country by now, were it not for certain interferences... US interest seems to seldom align with actual moderates.

Correct, US backing of leaders is purely based on corporate and political allegiance.

[Frumple]

Huh, looks like the stock market is shitting itself again or something?

[Maximum Spin]

There was a small dip, but the market overall is still higher than it had ever been in history before August. It's too soon to tell if this is going to be a cascading fall or a normal variation.

[Starver]

The whole point to the market is that it always aims to be "higher than any point in history". Relatively small timeslices when it isn't get left behind by the 'recovery' afterwards, that might not he as high as expected without the dips but still end up higher than the point just before crashes that interceded. It is always thus. It's the whole basis of the system.

The first time it never ever becomes "higher than at any time in history" again is going to be the shocker. As soon as we realise it has happened.

(Individual stocks, even individual markets, may never recover - like inumerable ones did not in history - but that's a localised failure, not stopping the global markets from continuing, and maybe even powering them towards this goal due to the amount of side-betting and other derivative functions that happen to ensure such mini-failures never actually lose everyone all their money.)

[Reelya]

I wonder how the corporate loans bubble intersects with what's going on

https://www.afr.com/wealth/personal-finance/next-crisis-will-be-triggered-by-subprime-corporate-loans-20200221-p54320

How much you wanna bet that Trump knows this shit is going to hit the fan and probably knows he's going to lose the election so he's trying to short-term prop up the markets so the crash happens on the next guy's watch?

[Starver]

Is there any doubt?