Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
T___A

US Politics Thread: Year 2 of 1000 of the TrumpenReich

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

There is no indication that Trump wanted Mattis to leave.  There is a big difference between getting fired and quitting while in good standing with your boss.

 

Hair splitting. No two sets of circumstances will be the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

 

 

No, you're in the wrong for being a gigantic douchecanoe to people just because they don't hate a political candidate that you hate.

 

So now you resort to personal insults because you can't make me agree with you.  Classy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Walter_Sobchak if one believes the news coverage, the issue is the SecDef disagrees with the President over Afghanistan and Syria. 

 

Having effectively destroyed ISIS, what objective at the operational and strategic level requires having US troops on the ground in Syria?

 

After extending the deployment of troops in Afghanistan for two years, what objectives were achieved and what purpose does having military personnel serve which hasn't already been tried for 17 years and trillions of dollars.

 

Trump campaigned on defeating ISIS and bringing the Aghanistan War to a close.

 

So if it's a choice of keeping the SecDef or bringing those conflicts to a close, it shouldn't be a surprise that the second option has been chosen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

There is no indication that Trump wanted Mattis to leave.  There is a big difference between getting fired and quitting while in good standing with your boss.

 

OK, now be honest, did you forget about the "Mattis is kind of a liberal" tweet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Donward said:

@Walter_Sobchak if one believes the news coverage, the issue is the SecDef disagrees with the President over Afghanistan and Syria. 

 

Having effectively destroyed ISIS, what objective at the operational and strategic level requires having US troops on the ground in Syria?

 

After extending the deployment of troops in Afghanistan for two years, what objectives were achieved and what purpose does having military personnel serve which hasn't already been tried for 17 years and trillions of dollars.

 

Trump campaigned on defeating ISIS and bringing the Aghanistan War to a close.

 

So if it's a choice of keeping the SecDef or bringing those conflicts to a close, it shouldn't be a surprise that the second option has been chosen.

 

Again, read Mattis' letter.  His issues with Trump went far deeper than just this Syrian issue.  It also speaks to the larger question of why do so many people keep leaving this administration? 

 

Frankly, I would love to see US troops out of Afghanistan.  But it needs to be done properly and not through "Presidential Tweet."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Again, read Mattis' letter.  His issues with Trump went far deeper than just this Syrian issue.  It also speaks to the larger question of why do so many people keep leaving this administration? 

 

Frankly, I would love to see US troops out of Afghanistan.  But it needs to be done properly and not through "Presidential Tweet."

 

I've read the letter. And I've been reading the news coverage. It seems that Syria/Afghanistan is the main sticking point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for the record, @Walter_Sobchak, I don't give a shit if you agree with me. Politically speaking like one other person does (and even he and I can find differences if we try a little bit). Relative to most people, my political views are well off the map. I'm never going to get a hive mind here, nor do I want one. I like the variety of opinions.

I also don't care if you are left wing or right wing or whatever. In fact, I feel pretty protective of the lefties on this forum because it's important not to have an echo chamber. I don't want any of you to leave or to suddenly swing right-of-center.

 

It's the TDS that drives me nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

Take offense if you want. Get mad if you have to. Just stop taking the blue pills dude.

 

 

Yeah, he forgets he was the one who started the insults months ago, of course, because mostly everyone here treats Walt with kid gloves because of his past temper tantrums followed by quitting and disappearing for months and then slinking back in ignoring the shit he spewed before he left. I think people were ok with that, because other than in the Trump thread, Walt was interesting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

 

Yeah, he forgets he was the one who started the insults months ago, of course, because mostly everyone here treats Walt with kid gloves because of his past temper tantrums followed by quitting and disappearing for months and then slinking back in ignoring the shit he spewed before he left. I think people were ok with that, because other than in the Trump thread, Walt was interesting...

 

I love Walt. I want him to stick around. He's fantastic, and he still does great work with T&AFVN and his posts outside this thread are routinely delightful. But at some point the TDS just gets to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Donward said:

 

I've read the letter. And I've been reading the news coverage. It seems that Syria/Afghanistan is the main sticking point.

 

How so? He only mentions ISIS tangentially in the letter, and syria or afghanistan aren't mentioned - he even explicitly states that the USA should not play world police

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Xlucine said:

 

How so? He only mentions ISIS tangentially in the letter, and syria or afghanistan aren't mentioned - he even explicitly states that the USA should not play world police

Hence the bit about the news coverage. Also, the fact that the "top us envoy in fight against ISIS" is resigning over it as well.

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/22/trump-syria-us-envoy-resignation-1074300

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taibbi getting digs in everywhere on this one:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-syria-withdrawal-772177/

 

"As to the argument that we’re abandoning Syria to Russians — anyone who is interested in reducing Russian power should be cheering. If there’s any country in the world that equals us in its ability to botch an occupation and get run out on a bloody rail after squandering piles of treasure, it’s Russia. They may even be better at it than us. We can ask the Afghans about that on our way out of there."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

 

Yeah, he forgets he was the one who started the insults months ago, of course, because mostly everyone here treats Walt with kid gloves because of his past temper tantrums followed by quitting and disappearing for months and then slinking back in ignoring the shit he spewed before he left. I think people were ok with that, because other than in the Trump thread, Walt was interesting...

 

I don't remember slinking away for months.  I know I have had periods where I post less than usual or avoid certain threads, but I don't think I have ever "disappeared for months."  Also, I don't think I have ever used outright insults.  I've vehemently diagreed with people, I've been a bit sharp at times.  I thought SH was all about wearing our big boy pants.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

Also, I don't think I have ever used outright insults.  I've vehemently diagreed with people, I've been a bit sharp at times.  I thought SH was all about wearing our big boy pants.  

 

I don't care about you disagreeing (I actually welcome it), and I don't mind you being a bit sharp. I called you out specifically because you were being pretty fucking condescending to other people on here. I'd probably have a lot more patience with that (condescension? in my SH?) if it weren't for the nonstop TDS.

Like you know what I mean by TDS, right? It's not "being a Democrat" or "being a liberal", nobody here cares about that. TDS is something else, it's where everything Trump does is bad regardless of what it is or whether it completely contradicts a previous "Trump is bad" position from even mere days ago. It's hugely frustrating, especially coming from someone I respect a lot otherwise.

 

I get that it's just how you see things. I wasn't born yesterday, I know that people can earnestly believe all sorts of things. I also get that I probably can't change your opinion. But I'm just trying to be straight with you, that's what gets me. It doesn't help that everyone, regardless of whether we watch the news or not, gets inundated with an endless deluge of TDS pushed by the news media all day long. I've been making an effort to treat you fairly and separately from fucking Don Lemon or whoever. I know you're not the same person as all them and you have your own views. But when you start saying effectively "you all are such shitsuckers for Trump that I bet you'll start talking about how Mattis leaving is a good thing", that's not exactly reciprocating that effort. That's why I called you out on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

I don't remember slinking away for months.  I know I have had periods where I post less than usual or avoid certain threads, but I don't think I have ever "disappeared for months."  Also, I don't think I have ever used outright insults.  I've vehemently diagreed with people, I've been a bit sharp at times.  I thought SH was all about wearing our big boy pants.  

 

 

Whatever dude,  I guess self-awareness isn't your thing either.   I suppose "wearing big boy pants" isn't a little shot or anything, no you are always a reasonable adult, and the other people pointing out your shit are all wrong and just out to get you!   :lol:   

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

 

Whatever dude,  I guess self-awareness isn't your thing either.   I suppose "wearing big boy pants" isn't a little shot or anything, no you are always a reasonable adult, and the other people pointing out your shit are all wrong and just out to get you!   :lol:   

 

 

 

 

Pretty sure taking shots at people you disagree with has been the defining characteristic of your online persona since the WOT forum days.  I don't think you got the title of Baby's Beloved Hunting Hound by accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talked it over a bit on the Discord and I think the right thing to do is to put a temporary moratorium on any editorializing in this thread. I am thinking that anything that's not "just the facts ma'am" will be hidden until New Year's Day. Nobody will be punished, but I think we've just gotta give each other some room for a little while.

 

If you want to get into fights, do it on the Discord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By T___A
      Might as well make a new thread now that the election is over.
    • By Tied
      Yes
       
      i personally support it, by finding the KGB Felix Dzerzhinsky greatly improved state scurrility both inside the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and abroad (their jurisdiction was only domestic, but they kept the internationally influential people safe at night)   a dedicated defender of both the Revolution and all the Soviet peoples     what do you think of this news?
    • By Xoon
      Colonization Of The Solar System

       
      This thread is for discussing the colonization of the solar system, mainly focusing on Mars and the Moon since they are the most relevant. 
      Main topics include transportation, industry, agriculture, economics, civil engineering,  energy production and distribution, habitation, ethics and politics. 
       
       
       
       
      First order of business, our glories tech messiah Elon Musk has set his eyes on Mars:
      Reason stated? Because being a interplanetary species beats being a single planetary species. 
       
      How does he plan to do this?
      By sending two cargo ships by 2022 to Mars for surveying and building  basic infrastructure, then two years later in 2024 sending 4 ships, two cargo ships and two crewed ships to start the colonization. First thing would be to build fuel refineries and expanding infrastructure to support more ships, then starting to mine and build industry. 
       
      This could mark a new era in human history, a second colonization era, this time without the genocides. The economic potentials are incredible, a single asteroid could easily support the entire earths gold, silver and platinum production for a decade. The moon holds a lot of valuable Helium 3, which right now is worth 12 000 dollars per kilogram! Helium is a excellent material for nuclear reactors. 
       
       
       

       
       
      Speaking about the moon, several companies have set their eyes on the moon, and for good reason.
      In my opinion,  the moon has the possibility of becoming a mayor trade hub for the solar system.  Why is this? Simply put, the earth has a few pesky things called gravity, atmosphere and environmentalists. This makes launching rockets off the moon much cheaper. The moon could even have a space elevator with current technology!  If we consider Elon Musk's plan to travel to Mars, then the Moon should be able to supply cheaper fuel and spaceship parts to space, to then be sent to Mars. The Moon is also rich in minerals that have not sunk to the core yet, and also has a huge amount of rare earth metals, which demands are rapidly increasing. Simply put, the Moon would end up as a large exporter to both the earth and potentially Mars. Importing from earth would almost always be more expensive compared to a industrialized Moon. 
       
      Now how would we go about colonizing the moon? Honestly, in concept it is quite simple.When considering locations, the South pole seems like the best candidate. This is because of it's constant sun spots, which could give 24 hour solar power to the colony and give constant sunlight to plants without huge power usage. The south pole also contain dark spots which contains large amount of frozen water, which would be used to sustain the agriculture and to make rocket fuel. It is true that the equator has the largest amounts of Helium 3 and the best location for rocket launches. However, with the lack of constant sunlight and frequent solar winds and meteor impacts, makes to unsuited for initial colonization. If the SpaceX's BFR successes, then it would be the main means of transporting materials to the moon until infrastructure is properly developed. Later a heavy lifter would replace it when transporting goods to and from the lunar surface, and specialized cargo ship for trans portion between the Moon, Earth and Mars. A space elevator would reduce prices further in the future.  Most likely, a trade station would be set up in CIS lunar space and Earth orbit which would house large fuel tanks and be able to hold the cargo from  cargo ships and heavy lifters. Sun ports would be designated depending on their amount of sunlight. Year around sunlight spots would be dedicated to solar panels and agriculture. Varying sun spots would be used for storage, landing pads and in general everything. Dark spots would be designated to mining to extract its valuable water. Power production would be inistially almost purely solar, with some back up and smoothing out generators. Later nuclear reactors would take over, but serve as a secondary backup energy source. 
       
       
      The plan:
      If we can assume the BFR is a success, then we have roughly 150 ton of payload to work with per spaceship. The first spaceship would contain a satellite to survey colonization spot. Everything would be robotic at first. Several robots capable of building a LZ for future ships,  mining of the lunar surface for making solar panels for energy production, then mining and refinement for fuel for future expeditions. The lunar colony would be based underground, room and pillar mining would be used to cheaply create room that is also shielded from radiation and surface hazards. Copying the mighty tech priest, a second ship would come with people and more equipment. With this more large scale mining and ore refinement would be started. Eventually beginning to manufacturing their own goods. Routinely BFRs would supply the colony with special equipment like electronics, special minerals and advanced equipment and food until the agricultural sector can support the colony.  The colony would start to export Helium 3 and rocket fuel, as well as spacecraft parts and scientific materials. Eventually becoming self sustaining, it would stop importing food and equipment, manufacturing it all themselves to save costs. 
       
      I am not the best in agriculture, so if some knowledge people could teach us here about closed loop farming, or some way of cultivating the lunar soil. Feel free to do so.
       
       
      Mining:
      I found a article here about the composition of the lunar soil and the use for it's main components:

      In short, the moon has large amounts of oxygen, silicon, aluminum, calcium, iron, magnesium and titanium in it's soil.
      How do we refine them? By doing this.
       
      Aluminum could be used for most kinds of wiring to requiring high conductivity to density ratio. Meaning power lines, building cables and such. Aluminum is not very suited for building structures on the surface because of the varying temperatures causing it to expand and contract. Iron or steel is better suited here. Aluminum could however be used in underground structures where temperatures are more stable.  Aluminum would also most likely end up as the main lunar rocket fuel. Yes, aluminum as rocket fuel. Just look at things like ALICE, or Aluminum-oxygen. Aluminum-oxygen would probably win out since ALICE uses water, which would be prioritized for the BFRs, since I am pretty sure they are not multi-fuel. 
       More on aluminum rocket fuel here:
      https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/88130-aluminum-as-rocket-fuel/&
      http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns2.php#umlunar
      https://blogs.nasa.gov/Rocketology/2016/04/15/weve-got-rocket-chemistry-part-1/
      https://blogs.nasa.gov/Rocketology/2016/04/21/weve-got-rocket-chemistry-part-2/
       
      Believe it or not, but calcium is actually a excellent conductor, about 12% better than copper. So why do we not use it on earth? Because it has a tendency to spontaneously combust in the atmosphere. In a vacuum however, this does not pose a problem. I does however need to be coated in a material so it does not deteriorate. This makes it suited for "outdoor" products and compact electrical systems like electric motors. Yes, a calcium electric motor.  
       
       
      Lastly, a few articles about colonizing the moon:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_the_Moon
      https://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-scientists-say-we-could-colonise-the-moon-by-2022-for-just-10-billion
      https://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/topnav/materials/listbytype/HEP_Lunar.html
       
      NASA article about production of solar panels on the moon:
      https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20050110155.pdf
       
      Map over the south pole:
      http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/images/gigapan
       
       
      Feel free to spam the thread with news regarding colonization. 
       
       
×