Print

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

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[Echo4]

So what's up with Rushmore?

Chief of the tribe has NOT GIVEN PERMISSION for President Trump to be on the land.  Isnt it the same land millions of tourists visit each year - and that the tribe makes money off?

As is their right, since SCOTUS correctly ruled that it was their land, which the US had ignored for decades.

What seems to be your problem with their not having given permission to Trump - not to mention that Trump's plan is not just to visit, but to set off fireworks.

7,500 people with no social distancing.

"There were July Fourth fireworks at Mount Rushmore for several years, but they were discontinued in 2009 over environmental concerns, including increased risk of fires."

Here's the drought monitor for South Dakota. Mt.Rushmore in the horizontal county in the lower left of the map, about 40% of the way going left to right from the state border - in other words, they are in drought conditions.

But you don't think the owners of the land should be allowed to decide what's going on there?!

[facilitatorn]

http://youtu.be/d1uNuayvqAw

I love that he’s not just turning on trump, but all trump’s GOP enablers.

Keep marching and let Joe float above it all from the comfort of his basement.

[bodiddley]

Chait:

The good news for President Trump’s campaign is that the candidate seems to be finally moving out of the denial stage and recognizing that he is losing to Joe Biden. Trump “has privately come to that grim realization in recent days,” multiple sources have told Politico.

The bad news is that Trump’s diagnosis of the problem seems to be somewhat underpowered. Jonathan Swan reports that Trump is blaming his predicament on bad advice from Jared Kushner. And while disregarding advice from Kushner is a generally sound principle, in this case, Kushner’s strategy made some sense. Trump regrets having followed the Kushner-led ploy of trying to appeal to Black voters. “One person who spoke with the president interpreted his thinking this way: “No more of Jared’s woke shit,” reports Swan.

Really I think Trump's belated election year attempt to get Black support was never going to work, was cynical, and a waste of resources.

But this helps explain why Jared has been sidelined of late.   

[bankshot1]

You're tiresome.

The US as honest broker has long been a useless sham, in which there is an ongoing phony peace process (Netanyahu admitted such after his first stint in office).

World opinion regarding Israel and Palestinians is very different than the US perspective.  I'd like Europe and/or the UN to have a crack at solving things.  But there is a good amount of anti-semitism in the UN/world.  So the US could be a check on that.  And that could be mitigated by making it a Security Council affair.

The US hasn't been able to solve the ME situation mostly because it was overly biased.  I don't care what the balance is between Europe, the UN and US is but if all three of those power centers were involved we'd have a more balanced approach.  The US could have a referee role to keep things honest.  Or more.  But if Israel was going to be subject to genuine pressure to agree to a plan, it could get done (and of course the threat of an ultimate US veto would always be there for Israel'a protection.

And I find your naivety and non-strategic thinking infantile.

You called fixing a long-running vexing political issue, one that has stumped leaders, statesman and diplomats from all over the globe for decades, an easy fix.

Your arrogance was only topped by a marked bias and non-stratgic thought process to problem solving.

You were questioned on your EZ fix  and mocked.

Upon being challenged you almost immediately flipped your position from non-US intervention to the US exerting its considerable will.

You do not take reasonable criticisms of your poorly thought out quick fixes at all well.   

But that was not my concern, nor is sparing your thin-skin, but rather it was exposing the folly of your naivety and the likely bias you bring to the table.

Fun chatting as always

HEH

[bodiddley]

For $1B I'd probably start worshiping a different lump of rocks.

Then again, I don't have any religious impulses.

[Echo4]

For $1B I'd probably start worshiping a different lump of rocks.

Then again, I don't have any religious impulses.

Do you have territorial impulses?

They were stolen from. They want what was taken, not what the government unilaterally decided to give them for it.

Hey, let's ignore all the gold that was taken illegally, not just the land, huh?!

This fix is easy, too?!

[facilitatorn]

The Jews went to he wrong place after WWII to start a country. Greenland would have been the right choice. Instead they went by the book and put their foot in a bear trap. Now they have no way of pulling it out.

I always thought it odd that one of the places under consideration was Uganda.
Aside from the fact that it was already populated, I never could see how that would work.  A malarial jungle deep in Africa.  Of course Israel was much more desert (if not deserted) back then and not tremendously hospitable.

It’s generally best to avoid malarial environments when choosing a place to settle down.

Kibbutz driven terraforming did wonders in Israel. That same mind and muscle could have made Greenland at least as pleasant and livable as parts of Finland if not Norway.

Too late for that now.

[barton]

But you don't think the owners of the land should be allowed to decide what's going on there?!

Prospectors found gold in 1874.  And the Gordon party found that there weren't enough Lakota in the hills to stop white incursions.   So much for the Fort Laramie treaty.   And sacred lands.   Not taking the cool billion is one of the things NAs did to assert their stance as one of not being bought off.   As they were,  in other places.   

[bodiddley]

The EZ fix (your infantile terms) is that once you have a plan that Europe/UN/US sign off on, Israel gets their arm twisted to agree to it.  (The Palestinians too)

Of course Israel and Palestinians get plenty of input.  But after a reasonable period of time, a deal is done and that's that.  No US veto to protect Israel from agreeing.  Palestinians have no ability to say No either.  Both get showered with money and praise.

That's how it gets done.  Of course its complicated.
Allow 3-5 years to hammer out all details, probably using Oslo or some other framework as the basic template.  Have a deadline.  It's doable if the US allows it to be doable.  At least Trump has ended the sham of an endless peace process to nowhere.   I offer my next stage.  What's yours?

[bankshot1]

Trump has accelerated what was taking place in Israel and Palestine.  But Israel politics has shifted so far to the right that the set of elections in the past year pitted Netanyahu against a coalition of generals who felt Bibi was too soft on Gaza/Hamas.
Really it'd be easy to change things and settle the Palestinian issue if the US would just step aside and stop providing Security Council veto cover for Israel.

EZ is objectionable/infantile?

LMAO

Bo you called the Israel-Palestinan an easy fix if only the US would but out and let the UN, who has exhibited a marked pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel bias for decades,  jam Israel with its solution.

I described that as your final solution, as it likely would have been an apocalyptic ending

BOOM!


Its not EZ is it Bo?

Keep on tinkering and spinning in your search for your final solution Bo.

I'm sure your next iteration will be improved.

[Echo4]

The Jews went to he wrong place after WWII to start a country. Greenland would have been the right choice. Instead they went by the book and put their foot in a bear trap. Now they have no way of pulling it out.

I always thought it odd that one of the places under consideration was Uganda.
Aside from the fact that it was already populated, I never could see how that would work.  A malarial jungle deep in Africa.  Of course Israel was much more desert (if not deserted) back then and not tremendously hospitable.

It’s generally best to avoid malarial environments when choosing a place to settle down.

Kibbutz driven terraforming did wonders in Israel. That same mind and muscle could have made Greenland at least as pleasant and livable as parts of Finland if not Norway.

Too late for that now.

As pleasant, but with nowhere to put the people, Fac.

[barton]

Bo you called the Israel-Palestinan an easy fix if only the US would but out and let the UN, who has exhibited a marked pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel bias for decades,  jam Israel with its solution.

I called that your final solution, as it likely would have been an apocalyptic ending....

Why would a UN solution favoring Palestine necessarily be

A.   Apocalyptic

B.   Anti-Semitic

I don't quite see that case being made by you.   Maybe Palestine,  after decades of brutal oppression and land theft by Far Right governments, DOES need favoring??   One can be pro-Palestine without perforce being anti-Israel.  Some feel it would be good for Israel to heed the angels of its better nature.   

[Echo4]

But you don't think the owners of the land should be allowed to decide what's going on there?!

Prospectors found gold in 1874.

George Armstrong Custer led that expedition, to find a place for a new fort and to see if there was gold to be mined.

His wagon train:

[bodiddley]

As long as Israel is immune from following international law, there will be no peaceful solution.  The US enables that.  That's my stepping off point.

[Echo4]

Bo you called the Israel-Palestinan an easy fix if only the US would but out and let the UN, who has exhibited a marked pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel bias for decades,  jam Israel with its solution.

I called that your final solution, as it likely would have been an apocalyptic ending....

Why would a UN solution favoring Palestine necessarily be

A.   Apocalyptic

B.   Anti-Semitic

I don't quite see that case being made by you.   Maybe Palestine,  after decades of brutal oppression and land theft by Far Right governments, DOES need favoring??   One can be pro-Palestine without perforce being anti-Israel.

I think the expression "favoring Palestine" is perforce anti-Israel. (I am not arguing antisemitic.)

It should ideally not favor either side.

I just don't see such a solution. I don't think either side is ready for anything approximating fair. And... I don't think there are only two sides. At least 3 and more likely 4.