Moving away from race, was anyone else really glad Trump didn't do something incredibly stupid over the drone being shot down? I hope he was exaggerating on how close it came to launching retaliatory military strikes, but whatever the case I'm glad he didn't. This is why I don't think he'll ever be as bad of a president as someone like GWB Jr, who would have been all over this shit with his cowboy antics. Sure, he IS saying a lot of stupid shit, and will continue to do so, but at least he avoided moving the needle to full retard so far. Not high standards admittedly, but such is the times we live in. The possibility of this spiraling into a war is still very real. Trump said he would meet with no preconditions, but Iran has just said "fuck it" and claimed they are planning to start stockpiling Uranium. Pakistan having nukes is bad, but Iran, whose entire foreign policy is essentially them constantly waving their dick around would be an entirely different ball game, and unlike NK they're not surrounded by stable neighbors.
His handling of the drone situation is the most “presidential” thing he’s done yet. He handled it maturely, and with patience. Not once has he ordered a hit on SkyNet over it.
How much you wanna bet that fucker was in Iranian airspace? I'd put money on it. I like how Tucker Carlson, of all fucking bowtied dipshits, was one of the main voices trying to talk him out of an attack, and the establishment Dems are criticizing him for backing off. That's what kind of upside down world we're living in now.
There’s no way Iran would provoke an unhinged administration like this for no reason. I think 2 things could be possible: It was in their airspace and rightfully got shot down. Or They flew it on purpose in Iranian airspace to get shot down so they could find a reason to up the aggression. It’s a distraction either way.
So I've got two theories, each viable, neither good. Trump ordered the attack, and then changed his mind after the planes were in the air This is not good because it either shows a lack of courage to follow through, or more likely, a lack of foresight before making decisions and giving orders of supreme consequence. There's no way that projected casualties wasn't part of his initial briefing on the attack. This is not good because this knowledge was immediately leaked to the press when that would never happen in any other Republican or Democratic administration. This indicates an incredible lack of faith on the part of the higher ups at DoD and/or the cabinet in the commander and chief. The "ordered but called back" story was a plant by the administration, which explains how it hit the press so fast, and was intended to serve as a warning to the Iranians. This is not good because the warning is essentially "we have a retard and we know how to use him!" The story makes Trump look indecisive and incompetent, and if they were going for some sort of Nixonian madman strategy, I'm not sure you need to give any more credibility to the idea that Trump is a madman. It's inflaming tensions for no reasonable gain. This is not good because we burned an accompanying cyber attack on Iranian defenses which they can now patch and prepare against solely to perform a stunt.
I just can’t get over how not big of a deal this actually is. They shot down your R/C toy. Who the fuck cares. Like you can’t afford another one, just counterfeit yourself some more money. Look to the Russians if you want to mouth off at some shit. Their ground-to-air fuck-ups result in vaporizing loaded passenger planes.
The depth you go to insist on spinning something into making Trump look bad is a little over the top. You thought him pulling out of the TPP was a fuck up too if I remember right. Well, even a broke clock is right twice a day. In Trump's case maybe more like twice a year, but you get the point. Whatever happened, it's a clear act of aggression by one, or both parties. It's not 9/11, but it's definitely not nothing. Air strikes have been called over less.
Yeah I really had to run a marathon to make Trump look bad for almost firing off missiles into Iran. You mean the trade deal where most of the negative parts were things the US insisted on inserting and thus a new administration could uninsist on, and that would have proven very useful in our current trade dispute with China? God forbid I was right as always.
I'd be interested in hearing a sneak peak on D's position on immigration reform. It seems like all the calories are burned and all the oxygen expended on Trump Bad but no substance elsewhere. It's unlikely I will ever support it, especially if it requires additional tax dollars but I'm always willing to listen.
This is the bill they recently passed in the House: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6 I do not know if that is the extent of what they consider reform, or if they plan to address border security elsewhere. Historically they have not been opposed to deals that include funding for border security, but have been adamant against "The Wall."
You read it so quickly. Did any particular parts jump out at you as needing attention? Or do you find fact that Democrats are attached to it objectionable?
I know a lot of you are opposed to illegal immigration. Which is fine. What I want to know is what you base that feeling on? Is it the bad brown people? Is it drugs? Is it taxes? Are you opposed to granting a pathway for citizenship to those that are already here? A lot of people become “illegal” because of a status change. Should they be removed? It just seems like the debate on it in this thread just goes back and forth between extreme strawmen like, “you want to do absolutely nothing about immigration” and “you just fucking hate brown people”. Neither of those positions are accurate. The wall idea itself is silly because most drugs come in through the ports. What do the conservatives on here actually want?
for me personally I dont like illegal immigration but all for legal immigrants. fuck the illegals that think the rules don't apply to them like the ones that got here legally.
I take a very libertarian view on drugs: legalize everything, people can do whatever they want as long as it only affects them. Make the drugs legal and the punishments stiffer if you do dangerous shit under the influence of them. Then the drug “trade” goes away and with it a shit load of problems people blame on immigration. Legalize it, regulate it, tax it and improve our crumbling infrastructure and education system with that money. The reality is, those who are here illegally don’t commit crimes at nearly the same rate as “regular” citizens. Because they have a lot more to lose if they get caught, mainly, getting deported back to the shithole they came from. I have absolutely zero problem with immigration, legal or otherwise, though of course believe there should be a pathway to legal citizenship for those who are currently here illegally and those who wish to enjoy the benefits of being part of our great country. I DO have a major issue with the legality of drugs and the enforcement of those laws. I believe solving one major problem will solve another perceived one.
I agree with this. A strong part of me feels like the republicans use central and South American immigration the same way they did with the southern strategy to shore up support from white voters over racial tensions. You can always find someone to blame for all the problems and give people a scapegoat for their racism, it generally works.
I like how you use one of the straw men you mentioned. If you want someone to actually reply with an answer, maybe don’t posit the question acidly.
It was meant to be more jokey. I think I typed a pretty good faith post on here considering all the rest of what I wrote.
Ok. Then let’s first settle some general bullshit about immigration. Most immigrants don’t come from Mexico. They come from India, The Philippines and Canada. Second, illegal immigration from Mexico is down overall since 2007. Third, The majority (66%) of illegal immigrant adults from Mexico have been residing in the US for nearly a decade or more. Fourth, the widely circulated "fact" that Obama deported millions of migrants is mostly bullshit. His administration generously expanded the definition of "deportation" to include anyone turned away at the border, not just ones that were scooped up by ICE and shuttled south. So with that information, what should happen? Two things should be established. No one has a right to be in the United States that wasnt born here, and maybe even the natural born clause should be revisited. Thats an absurd conjecture that no other sovereign nation on Earth seems to have an issue grappling with. The second thing is border security and the topic of what to do the with the illegals needs to be separated. And yeah illegals, by definition, broke the law to get here. That being said, it clearly doesnt make sense to deport them. The emotional, economic and social cost of deporting regular people is just too high to have it make sense. That doesnt make it right, but thats the reality. Convicted felons and repeat offenders of misdemeanors should be deported as a matter of policy, no exceptions. For everyone else, you have to either give them everything (full citizenship) or nothing, an in-between doesnt work. You cant have a parallel society of 2nd-class citizens. The current pathways are bound by red tape a mile long and extremely expensive, so in that regard, I understand why illegals just shrug their shoulders and take their chances. Public service or military service should guarantee citizenship immediately without strings attached. There are 77,000 non-citizen soldiers in the US military. I think that proposal is more than fair. For those that dont want to engage in public service, reduce the cost to nothing, make them fill out the applications, begin learning the language (English) and take their oath. It shouldnt cost upwards of $80K and 10 years to make that happen. Failure to do so means revocation or denial of social services. You dont get money from the US unless you are in the system. Period. For border security, you need to stop the bleeding in some regard. That just needs to happen. Mexico elected an actual nationalist that has the economic retardation of Bernie Sanders with the charming personality of Trump, so good luck getting that guy on board with curbing his own outflow of migrants. Whether or not a wall is an effective deterrent is a matter of tactics rather than strategy. Its not the end-all, be-all of border enforcement. Im not a proponent of using the military to enforce border security, but the funding of patrols and surveillance needs to be dramatically increased. As for the concentration camp propaganda, again, its mostly political bullshit. It was all started in 2011 so Obama looked tough heading in 2012. Hell, most of the photos passed around are pre-Trump. The people separated from families is largely to weed out the rampant human and sexual trafficking thats taking place. Many families are split up ahead of transit and randomly combined with other people to have a higher chance of a successful crossing. That humanitarian crisis is borne from Mexico, not the US. For any crimes or abuses by border agents, prosecute them harshly. I dont see why any of that is unreasonable.
I’ve stayed mostly out of this thread but are we finally to the point when some people on this board defend the practice of locking kids in cages or vans with foil blankets and denying them basic services?
Bernie wants to cancel all student debt. On a selfish level, I’m all for it. What does this do to the economy if it even came close to passing?