Ridin’ with Biden

[InCali]

"Expecto Patronum"?

Mine’s a dog.

 

[Flint Marko]

It’s just insanity they haven’t sent out $1400 yet. Insanity

 

[moviedoors]

Remember when Trump did like ten thousand executive orders?

Remember when FDR did like 3700?

 

[Eddie Dean]

Remember when FDR did that and people loved him so much that they let him have a third term?

 

[Fosterson]

I really wish American leftists and progressives would stop conflating "Syria" with Iranian-backed militias whose sole purpose for being in that country is to prop up a genocidal regime.

It's perfectly fine to oppose the bombing, but the above conflation betrays a lack of understanding of the complexities of situations such as these...

Far too often the American (and more generally, Western) left tends to view conflicts such as the one in Syria purely through the lens of their own country's involvement. This can often lead to one lacking the necessary context to understand the full picture.

 

[InCali]

I really wish American leftists and progressives would stop conflating "Syria" with Iranian-backed militias whose sole purpose for being in that country is to prop up a genocidal regime.

It's perfectly fine to oppose the bombing, but the above conflation betrays a lack of understanding of the complexities of situations such as these...

Far too often the American (and more generally, Western) left tends to view conflicts such as the one in Syria purely through the lens of their own country's involvement. This can often lead to one lacking the necessary context to understand the full picture.

You've got my attention. While I personally think military force should be a last resort, there are times when it's warranted. TBH, I haven't been focused on military matter recently. I would like to hear your take on the current situation in the middle east.

 

[Flint Marko]

The Onion don't miss

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

But the ‘never leave’ is a miss - not indefinite imprisonment like Trump. Also it’s unaccompanied minors.

 

[Schlosser85]

Yea, actually it missed several times.

 

[InCali]

I'm curious as to what the "right" solution is if you find unaccompanied minors.

 

[Marvolo]

so the Dems don't have to stick to their promises even as they have all the power? The excuse is Manchin. You know they can't pass it the other way. They can this way, and the only threat they have is no aid, something even Manchin fears.

What is this parliamentary thing, and since when does america have a parliament?

 

[InCali]

What is this parliamentary thing, and since when does america have a parliament?

A parliamentarian basically makes judgements according to certain established rules. Leave it to the senate to come up with arcane rulings based on stupid past practice and hold them dear. While I've made arguments about how to proceed given the parliamentarian's ruling, those arguments were based on the practicality of getting a law passed in the senate. Obviously, the senate shouldn't be beholden to an unelected official when it comes to their vote on a certain bill.

 

[Tempus Fugit]

I'm curious as to what the "right" solution is if you find unaccompanied minors.

Let them continue to wander across the Arizona/New Mexico/Texas desert without food/water/shelter of any kind?

 

[Fosterson]

You've got my attention. While I personally think military force should be a last resort, there are times when it's warranted. TBH, I haven't been focused on military matter recently. I would like to hear your take on the current situation in the middle east.

I'm not advocating military intervention, and I think there are principled grounds to be opposed to it in this case and others.

I was simply drawing attention to what I regard as a worrying trend in too much left-wing anti-war discourse.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I'm curious as to what the "right" solution is if you find unaccompanied minors.

Treat them like lost children not hardened criminals.

Build a cozy facility for children specifically.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

A parliamentarian basically makes judgements according to certain established rules. Leave it to the senate to come up with arcane rulings based on stupid past practice and hold them dear. While I've made arguments about how to proceed given the parliamentarian's ruling, those arguments were based on the practicality of getting a law passed in the senate. Obviously, the senate shouldn't be beholden to an unelected official when it comes to their vote on a certain bill.

They aren't.

I'm curious as to what the "right" solution is if you find unaccompanied minors.

Placement with a family. Whether it is their own (many of these kids do have family here) or a foster family. You know, things you'd do with kids if you found them and they were American.

 

[InCali]

Treat them like lost children not hardened criminals.

Build a cozy facility for children specifically.

I agree with that and I'll be the first to say I don't know the details of their detention. I saw video of what was going on in the Trump admin during a pandemic and was sickened by it.

If these kids and young adults are being in any way, shape or form being treated like that, I will be outraged.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I really wish American leftists and progressives would stop conflating "Syria" with Iranian-backed militias whose sole purpose for being in that country is to prop up a genocidal regime.

It's perfectly fine to oppose the bombing, but the above conflation betrays a lack of understanding of the complexities of situations such as these...

Far too often the American (and more generally, Western) left tends to view conflicts such as the one in Syria purely through the lens of their own country's involvement. This can often lead to one lacking the necessary context to understand the full picture.

From my understanding this was "retaliation" for the death of I believe one US trooper and one US contractor by a militia that Iran states they were not responsible for. The US killed at least 22 people, who were apparently stationed at a base where their primary goal is fighting ISIS.

If Iran bombs us, might they have a reason? Could there have been a reason as of late that they might not like us? Could we have maybe pulled out of a certain deal and then assassinated a certain military leader of theirs?

Trump might be gone, but what he did still happened. We are still responsible for it. Why did they not seek congressional approval? Breaking international law to bomb a foreign country matters no matter who the president is.

 

[InCali]

They aren't.


Placement with a family. Whether it is their own (many of these kids do have family here) or a foster family. You know, things you'd do with kids if you found them and they were American.

When you say "they aren't", you are 100% correct. I was speaking in the sense that they "shouldn't personally" be beholden. Some, like Manchin, in particular, seem to be.

I agree placement with families would be ideal. I would, frankly, be very cautious about letting someone in my home and not just because of the present circumstances (coronavirus). Everything that can, should be done to make sure everyone picked up is treated in a humane manner. I hope the Biden administration is doing everything they can on this matter. In the meantime, this is why we have a free press. I want to know more details and it needs to be covered far and wide so people understand how we're dealing with this crisis.....ratings be damned.

 

[Fosterson]

I recommend that you read post #2762, where I state that I am not advocating military intervention.

Now:

From my understanding this was a "reliation" for the death of I believe one US trooper and a contractor by a militia that Iran states they were not responsible for. The US killed 17 people, who were apparently stationed at a base where their primary goal is fighting ISIS.

Iran's primary reason for being in Syria is to prop up Assad. Iran has been supporting Assad since 2011 when the Syrian revolution began and long before ISIS or other jihadist groups had any sort of presence in the country.

Have Iranian-backed forces fought ISIS? Yes. But that still doesn't change the fact that they have also committed numerous war crimes and that their primary reason for being in the country is to support a regime that uses chemical weapons against its own citizens and has carried mass extrajudicial executions numbering in at least the tens of thousands.

If Iran bombs us, might they have a reason? Could there have been a reason as of late that they might not like us? Could we have maybe pulled out of a certain deal and then assassinated a certain military leader of theirs?

Trump might be gone, but what he did still happened.

Again, I am not justifying the decision to bomb, and I am certainly not endorsing Trump's assassination of Soleimani. I am not advocating any policy. I am simply critiquing the unfortunate tendency of some American leftists to view conflicts such as the one in Syria purely through the lens of their own country's involvement.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

When you say "they aren't", you are 100% correct. I was speaking in the sense that they "shouldn't personally" be beholden. Some, like Manchin, in particular, seem to be.

I agree placement with families would be ideal. I would, frankly, be very cautious about letting someone in my home and not just because of the present circumstances (coronavirus). Everything that can, should be done to make sure everyone picked up is treated in a humane manner. I hope the Biden administration is doing everything they can on this matter. In the meantime, this is why we have a free press. I want to know more details and it needs to be covered far and wide so people understand how we're dealing with this crisis.....ratings be damned.

No, he's not. Excuses are what they are. Excuses.

You'd be cautious of letting a child into your house if you are a registered care provider for children? Why? I'd understand COVID, but other then that, they are just kids.

A free press, where a large portion that is taken in is made up of for profit companies that support one of the two parties. Moreover, it doesn't matter what anyone reports, when people are bias towards either of the parties, they accept their explanations out of hand.

The two stories, the bombing and the child placement situation, is a good example of this. Both of these things were condemned under Trump. When Obama and Biden do them, less so. Even when you have organization and human rights attorneys pointing out the issues and condemning them. Where with Trump MSNBC or CNN, they amplified these voices. Now, not so much. Hell, Andrew Cuomo is being accused of being Trump basically, and no one is talking about it.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I recommend that you read post #2762, where I state that I am not advocating military intervention.

Now:



Iran's primary reason for being in Syria is to prop up Assad. Iran has been supporting Assad since 2011 when the Syrian revolution began and long before ISIS or other jihadist groups had any sort of presence in the country.

Have Iranian-backed forces fought ISIS? Yes. But that still doesn't change the fact that they have also committed numerous war crimes and that their primary reason for being in the country is to support a regime that uses chemical weapons against its own citizens and has carried mass extrajudicial executions numbering in at least the tens of thousands.



Again, I am not justifying the decision to bomb, and I am certainly not endorsing Trump's assassination of Soleimani. I am not advocating any policy. I am simply critiquing the unfortunate tendency of some American leftists to view conflicts such as the one in Syria purely through the lens of their own country's involvement.

What part of this makes what we did right, or legal? More over, are we not responsible for what our own country does? It's really hard to argue that we play any sort of intervention games in the Middle East, considering we continue good relations with Israel and Saudi Arabia. Two countries we theoretically should be intervening in the actions of considering what we ourselves admit they have both been doing.

One must not ignore the realities of the US actions through a lens purely of our own country's involvement, when ignoring the hypocrisy of our policy. Also, yes it was illegal. That matters from any lens.

 

[InCali]

No, he's not. Excuses are what they are. Excuses.

You'd be cautious of letting a child into your house if you are a registered care provider for children? Why? I'd understand COVID, but other then that, they are just kids.

A free press, where a large portion that is taken in is made up of for profit companies that support one of the two parties. Moreover, it doesn't matter what anyone reports, when people are bias towards either of the parties, they accept their explanations out of hand.

The two stories, the bombing and the child placement situation, is a good example of this. Both of these things were condemned under Trump. When Obama and Biden do them, less so. Even when you have organization and human rights attorneys pointing out the issues and condemning them. Where with Trump MSNBC or CNN, they amplified these voices. Now, not so much. Hell, Andrew Cuomo is being accused of being Trump basically, and no one is talking about it.

WRT Excuses.....I agree. But Manchin's vote will be as it is and it isn't on Schumer (who I dislike intensely and have often spoken my wish that AOC would primary him) or anyone else.

I'm not a registered care provider and would have concerns about being one (quite possibly out of ignorance or just, maybe, raising my own children LOL).

Agree about the "press" and I think I even started a thread regarding how a "free" press would look in a socialist economy. This is a huge problem and this idea that corporations have free speech rights is toxic to democracy (and, by extension, voting).

Again, I don't know the details, but was/is what Trump and Obama/Biden doing comparable? I have no doubt that Obama did some pretty Ef'ed up S***, but is this particular situation (fully under Biden's watch) comparable? Your point about retaliation, is on point IMO. International capital is what it is and will inevitably lead to 9/11s and so forth. That being said, the Iranian "revolution" where some of my "left wing friends" declared the overthrow of the Shah a "progressive" revolution stuck in my throat at the time and I still have a lump in there. At some point, someone needs to call a halt, end retaliation, and fix the problem.

 

[Fosterson]

Congratulations for completely ignoring both of my previous posts! I fear this may be a futile exercise, but alas, I am too masochistic to shy away from a challenge such as this!

What part of this makes what we did right, or legal?

As I clearly stated above, I am NOT advocating military intervention. I am not in fact, advocating any particular policy. I am not so arrogant as to assume that I can prescribe the correct course of action to deal with highly complex foreign policy situations like this!

I fear you may be under the misapprehension that I am some kind of neoconservative or liberal hawk, when the truth is quite different.

More over, are we not responsible for what our own country does?

True, although only focusing on the actions of one's own country won't allow one to fully grasp the big picture of many events or crises, especially one as multi-faceted as the Syrian Civil War.

I fully agree that any responsible citizen has a duty to hold their government accountable, however. That is a healthy and necessary part of democracy.

It's really hard to argue that we play any sort of intervention games in the Middle East, considering we continue good relations with Israel and Saudi Arabia. Two countries we theoretically should be intervening in the actions of considering what we ourselves admit they have both been doing.

Israel and Saudi Arabia are both certainly guilty of serious human rights abuses, and I can assure you that I hold no candle for either Bibi or MBS. However, I fail to see how this is relevant in this particular discussion. You seem to be changing the goalposts here a little. First you said that Iran was in Syria to fight ISIS. Then I responded by pointing out that this was incorrect. Now, you bring up American support for other countries that also abuse human rights to show why the decision to bomb was incorrect, when that was never my argument in the first place.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

WRT Excuses.....I agree. But Manchin's vote will be as it is and it isn't on Schumer (who I dislike intensely and have often spoken my wish that AOC would primary him) or anyone else.

I'm not a registered care provider and would have concerns about being one (quite possibly out of ignorance or just, maybe, raising my own children LOL).

Agree about the "press" and I think I even started a thread regarding how a "free" press would look in a socialist economy. This is a huge problem and this idea that corporations have free speech rights is toxic to democracy (and, by extension, voting).

Again, I don't know the details, but was/is what Trump and Obama/Biden doing comparable? I have no doubt that Obama did some pretty Ef'ed up S***, but is this particular situation (fully under Biden's watch) comparable? Your point about retaliation, is on point IMO. International capital is what it is and will inevitably lead to 9/11s and so forth. That being said, the Iranian "revolution" where some of my "left wing friends" declared the overthrow of the Shah a "progressive" revolution stuck in my throat at the time and I still have a lump in there. At some point, someone needs to call a halt, end retaliation, and fix the problem.

The big difference is we are no longer separating kids from family, which is a good thing. But even Trump stopped doing that after all the anger. But that wasn't what the rally cry was. People were upset with the images of kids in cages. Something Obama's administration also did and we are now don't again. Moreover, this is happening while Biden's administration allows ICE to continue it reign of ****ing terror. When he said he would stop deportations. Something he could have done through other means then he already tried.

The bombings are no different, and haven't been as far back as I have looked it up, which is Reagan. Republicans are less vocal about it overall no matter who the president is, because they support it pretty much outright.