[Tainari88]

Interesting analysis of a Civil Rights Attorney. It is very interesting. What is your opinion?

[Steve_American]

Which message do you think is the alarming one?

My response is that this is one more reason to re-balance the USSC.
.

[Rich]

What is your opinion?

Another deranged Liberal. It speaks to the madness of the Liberals that any of them really thought it would be a good idea to have individual states vetting the candidates for the Presidency. Luckily the Liberals were saved by the fact that the liberal Supreme Court judges were not completely stupid. If this policy had been applied in 2016, I'm sure many States would have judged Hilary a criminal and kept her off the ballot.

If the Liberals were smart there are things to they could do to counter Republican systemic advantage. The obvious place to start is to insist on full Senatorial representation for DOC. They could invoke the precedent of the Tea Party to justify violent direct action. The American forbears did not restrict themselves to peaceful, legal protest when they considered that they lacked fair representation.

[Tainari88]

Which message do you think is the alarming one?

My response is that this is one more reason to re-balance the USSC.
.

The Civil Rights Atty Ifill states that it is chipping away at what the US Congress is allowed to do. And the last precedent that interprets the 14th amendment of the US Constitution to do something similar was pre American Civil War. For me? That is a big indicator of a coming violent situation.

I do not think this bodes well for Trump being removed state to state. It is unanimous. He gets a shot at the presidency.

And if there is some legal fight over if some votes are controversial? The court is going to side with Trump.

That is how I interpret all of that.

[Tainari88]

Another deranged Liberal. It speaks to the madness of the Liberals that any of them really thought it would be a good idea to have individual states vetting the candidates for the Presidency. Luckily the Liberals were saved by the fact that the liberal Supreme Court judges were not completely stupid. If this policy had been applied in 2016, I'm sure many States would have judged Hilary a criminal and kept her off the ballot.

If the Liberals were smart there are things to they could do to counter Republican systemic advantage. The obvious place to start is to insist on full Senatorial representation for DOC. They could invoke the precedent of the Tea Party to justify violent direct action. The American forbears did not restrict themselves to peaceful, legal protest when they considered that they lacked fair representation.

The issue is the quality of the candidates Rich. A lot of them have a lot of skeletons in the closet. Since if you are a career politician in the US or in the UK? You got a lot of questionable behavior going on. But Trump is just not as subtle as many other candidates have been. For me Trump gets away with a lot. But so do a lot of those other candidates that are considered establishment candidates.

I mean invading Iraq was a complete disaster on behalf of the Bush administration. A bunch of preemptive strikes and so on...how is Iraq faring today? A disaster.

Yet, somehow la Hilary is the right candidate.

They need to stop backing these establishment candidates in the Democratic party.

They did not put in a liberal-leaning SCOTUS judge when Obama was in his last lame-duck year and then they resent Trump shoving in his conservative justices? Please.

You do not act in time? To get something done? And then you cry when it does not happen?

I think the Right in the USA is aggressive, violent, intolerant, racist, sexist, corrupt, and rotten.

But not doing what needs to happen to do your political agenda when faced with challenges from the other party because you lack the political will and you have a bunch of two-faced people who are benefitting just as much as the enemy there on the other side of the political spectrum? It is complete hypocrisy.

You lose a lot of moral high ground with two-faced shit.

The liberals have way too much two-faced shit. And they are not without violence and backing wars. That is all they do. Warmongering along with the Republicans. More hawkish and warmongering than Hillary Rodham Clinton was in her foreign policy deals during her years as Secretary of State is just denying reality. I have read Hillary's politics and policies. She finally after lying about it for years stated that the Tailban in Afghanistan was the US government's doing. They create the weather and then are surprised when it hits them in the face later down the road.

That stacked court is what happens when you do not pay attention to what needs to happen to change and adjust in time, and you get used to conventional as is shitty politics.

[Rich]

I mean invading Iraq was a complete disaster on behalf of the Bush administration. A bunch of preemptive strikes and so on...how is Iraq faring today? A disaster.

Er no its doing brilliantly. I have to say the International Marxist-Liberal lie machine has done a good job of hiding the truth. When are Marxists, socialists and left liberals going to have the moral courage to admit that they were totally wrong about removing Saddam and give thanks to Bush and Blair for their great and noble intervention.

[Tainari88]

Er no its doing brilliantly. I have to say the International Marxist-Liberal lie machine has done a good job of hiding the truth. When are Marxists, socialists and left liberals going to have the moral courage to admit that they were totally wrong about removing Saddam and give thanks to Bush and Blair for their great and noble intervention.

Rich you think intervening is a good thing in history? Leaving power vacuums to be filled by other people that are chosen not by the regular folk suffering through all those dictatorships? Not even John Nixon a CIA analyst who interviewed Saddam Hussein can back your claim that you wrote. The dude was interviewed by Democracy Now in 2016. If ever there was a case for being better at international politics and cultural anthropology it is that rap that Nixon gave to Democracy Now. I would never send a CIA analyst with such a task as getting real information from a leader of a nation you are planning on invading? That did not speak fluent Arabic, and had a deep understanding of what that entire historical context was. You do not do that. But the US and the UK do it all the time because they are ARROGANT. They think they know what the hell is going on there with other cultures. That is the issue in a nutshell. You have that tendency too. Then when it all goes to shit and the extremist terrorists arrive in England to blow people up....you think....Barbaric people. How could they do this? When you had no clue the Saddam types already were thinking of how to cope with those people LONG LONG ago and by being more into information instead of being into stereotypes of imperial conquest you would have had the tools to avoid a disaster. But no. Being class conscious pricks and so on triumphs in the minds of the weak leadership in history. YET AGAIN. I rest my case.

No, imperialism might do a good thing once in a while, with some crazy stroke of good luck. But in general it is usually very destabilizing. And stabilizing a nation, a clear plan for how it will recover from the shock and getting different diverse groups to cooperate is never easy.

https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/ ... today.aspx

https://www.google.com/search?q=CIA+int ... ZQ-so,st:0

You got the British like Blair worrying about not alienating George Bush Jr. He was out of his depth. Totally. His interpretation of what he had to do was totally wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... sts-of-war

It is easy for you Rich to think that they are not English. Let them die. Who cares? No. You really do have to do the hard work of learning Arabic, studying the history, and the relationships and working on that issue of UNDERSTANDING the ARAB MINDSET. Not the Anglo one. Not the Cowboy mediocre man from Washington DC. But the one that is there in that country. Because again? If you do not do that work? You will not understand that reality. You do not understand that reality? You will be just destroying life. And not making anything better. If that is what you want to do? Kill anything that is not English? Then you got serious issues.


I will never agree with having wars for power or invasions. The British did too much of that. Where is the money? Where is the glory for the regular blokes over there in England? It all stays with the upper crust.

When will men like you Rich realize that if you are not upper class? You will never be part of any glory?

And stop identifying with the acts of a bunch of callous and greedy elitist men who never knew their parents well, raised by nannies, caretakers and crazy rituals meant to desensitize them all to empathetic connective and sane sense of what is the best path for all and not for their own crazy club?

You class conscious imperially minded people need to stop thinking that by domination you win in this world. The only thing you do is piss people off and waste resources, waste time, and delay truly great human potential by never investing in the center of all politics. The vast masses out there. Left to rot as you little boys play your war games and waste everyone's hard sweat on wars that never end well.

[late]

If I feel better, I'll do a more in depth post later.

For now, in 2000, when a quick decision benefited the Republican, they took all of 4 days. But now going slow benefits Trump... That gal was right when she described them as deeply cynical.

The law here is complicated, and unfinished. This decision won't help, since it will have to be revisited.

Has to be redone because the SC just turned the Constitution inside out. Used to be Congress had to vote to remove a restriction. Now Congress would have to vote to impose a restriction. But since that vote is basically impossible to pull off, the SC will be dragged into this again, because they've gutted part of the Constitution.

[late]

When are Marxists, socialists and left liberals going to have the moral courage to admit that they were totally wrong about removing Saddam and give thanks to Bush and Blair for their great and noble intervention.

A lot of Republicans opposed that. Let's start with "You break it, you bought it, Pottery Barn. (Sec of State Colin Powell). Shinseki, testifying before Congress, opposed the plan.

The PNAC morons got snookered by an Iraqi, who told them what they wanted to hear. The CIA tried to talk the morons out of it, they didn't listen.

So we blew about 4 TRILLION dollars, and made things in the ME worse.

It was a disaster.

[Tainari88]

If I feel better, I'll do a more in depth post later.

For now, in 2000, when a quick decision benefited the Republican, they took all of 4 days. But now going slow benefits Trump... That gal was right when she described them as deeply cynical.

The law here is complicated, and unfinished. This decision won't help, since it will have to be revisited.

Has to be redone because the SC just turned the Constitution inside out. Used to be Congress had to vote to remove a restriction. Now Congress would have to vote to impose a restriction. But since that vote is basically impossible to pull off, the SC will be dragged into this again, because they've gutted part of the Constitution.

The law is part of the state apparatus Late. So trying to ever argue that it is free of political manipulation is really not helpful. Judges do have political philosophies and the law is open to the historical contexts of their period of American history.

It is not accident that Brown vs the Board of Education happened in 1954. It was a few years after WWII when fascism was defeated in Europe and the Axis was crushed. Black soldiers fought in that war. They came back home and many people said why did I fight for equality in Europe when I can't have it at home?

So? the time was ripe for change.

Now you have a court that is political. It is going to act against the political class they find is the enemy. Period.

I do not know who is going to win the election Late. Whether Biden or Trump. It is a very strange election.

But the reality is that the MAGAs are not going away Late.

So what do you think it means?

[late]

The law is part of the state apparatus Late. So trying to ever argue that it is free of political manipulation is really not helpful. Judges do have political philosophies and the law is open to the historical contexts of their period of American history.

It is not accident that Brown vs the Board of Education happened in 1954. It was a few years after WWII when fascism was defeated in Europe and the Axis was crushed. Black soldiers fought in that war. They came back home and many people said why did I fight for equality in Europe when I can't have it at home?

So? the time was ripe for change.

Now you have a court that is political. It is going to act against the political class they find is the enemy. Period.

I do not know who is going to win the election Late. Whether Biden or Trump. It is a very strange election.

But the reality is that the MAGAs are not going away Late.

So what do you think it means?

No idea.

I expect Biden will win, but I worry that the glue that holds a civilisation together has dissolved. That modern propaganda has overwhelmed too many minds. That Putin was too successful in his attempt to undermine the West, and the result will devastate Russia, but many other countries almost as badly.

When I was young, I liked Marshall McLuhan a lot. The medium is the message, I think a lot how technology can have explosive consequences, and that over the course of our lives, humanity has never seen so many advances in technology.

Better to ask me on a day when I am feeling better.

[Rich]

A lot of Republicans opposed that. Let's start with "You break it, you bought it, Pottery Barn. (Sec of State Colin Powell). Shinseki, testifying before Congress, opposed the plan.

The PNAC morons got snookered by an Iraqi, who told them what they wanted to hear. The CIA tried to talk the morons out of it, they didn't listen.

So we blew about 4 TRILLION dollars, and made things in the ME worse.

It was a disaster.

It was a fantastic success unless you live in the pathetic fantasy world of the Liberal.

Oh dear what planet are these Liberals living in. Bush and Blair at least partly fixed Iraq they didn't break it. What is now Iraq was one of the most advanced civilisations on the planet until the Muslims came and turned it into a shithole. However even by the standards of the Muslims, the modern Iraqi state was created broken. It was a Shia majority country with a large Kurdish minority ruled by the Sunni Arab ethnic minority.

Iraq's best hope for a more secular path was the merger with Syria, which would have put the Sunni and Shia into rough balance. Saddam in part siezed power to forestall the merger. Iraq was further broken by the Iran Iraq war, and then by the invasion of Kuwait and the Gulf War of 91. It was then yet further broken by massive insurrections in north and south and their genocidal suppression. It was further broken by the loss of de-facto sovereignty over parts of Kurdistan and then the country was paced under crippling sanctions for 11 years.

I repeat what kind of cretin compares removing Saddam and the Baath regime,ending sanctions, giving autonomy to the Kurds and instituting democratic majority rule to breaking a piece of pristine pottery in a pottery barn?

[late]

It was a fantastic success unless you live in the pathetic fantasy world of the Liberal.

Your inability to deal with the real world is duly noted.

"The U.S. invasion of Iraq twenty years ago is rightly considered to be a major strategic blunder that destabilized the Middle East, consumed significant American resources, and sapped the power of the United States. For Iraq, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s repressive regime cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, displaced and wounded millions more, and wrought widespread destruction.

In addition, Iraq’s sovereignty remains compromised: Turkey’s security forces maintain a string of bases in northern Iraq (some dating back to the mid-1990s) from which they target the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a militant group that has been waging an on-again off-again war against Turkey since the mid-1980s. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is also present in Iraq, mostly to coordinate with pro-Iran militias.

The presence of the IRGC and the existence of pro-Iran militias, notably the Badr Organization, Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, Kata’ib Hezbollah, and Saraya al-Salam, both underscore the influence Tehran has in Iraq. Where Iraq and Iran once balanced each other in the Persian Gulf, the American invasion greatly weakened the former, providing an opportunity for Tehran to ensure that Iraq could never again threaten Iran as it did during the countries’ 1980–1988 war."

https://www.cfr.org/article/twenty-year ... -democracy

That's just the short and sweet of it. If you dig in, it looks a lot worse. Iran has so much influence in Iraq that the Saudi are crapping their pants.

Foreign affairs analysis is not generally determined by the political flavor of the day. Domestic politics are too ephemeral.

Many analysts are conservative (the real kind, not the radicals you see today that only say they are conservative.) Peter Zeihan is conservative, you could learn a lot from him.

We spent trillions, the ME is less stable, and we wound up helping Iran become a major player. The Iraq war is considered by most to be a failure. To someone with my way of looking at things, it was a disaster.

[wat0n]

What does this have to do with economics?

[late]

What does this have to do with economics?

Thread drift..

[Tainari88]

It was a fantastic success unless you live in the pathetic fantasy world of the Liberal.

Oh dear what planet are these Liberals living in. Bush and Blair at least partly fixed Iraq they didn't break it. What is now Iraq was one of the most advanced civilisations on the planet until the Muslims came and turned it into a shithole. However even by the standards of the Muslims, the modern Iraqi state was created broken. It was a Shia majority country with a large Kurdish minority ruled by the Sunni Arab ethnic minority.

Iraq's best hope for a more secular path was the merger with Syria, which would have put the Sunni and Shia into rough balance. Saddam in part siezed power to forestall the merger. Iraq was further broken by the Iran Iraq war, and then by the invasion of Kuwait and the Gulf War of 91. It was then yet further broken by massive insurrections in north and south and their genocidal suppression. It was further broken by the loss of de-facto sovereignty over parts of Kurdistan and then the country was paced under crippling sanctions for 11 years.

I repeat what kind of cretin compares removing Saddam and the Baath regime,ending sanctions, giving autonomy to the Kurds and instituting democratic majority rule to breaking a piece of pristine pottery in a pottery barn?

The Middle East has been intervened with for many years since and before WWI. So all this bullshit you spout Rich is just that. Bullshit.

The UK had to secure their petrol. So the Middle East is where they went to manipulate and create fake states and draw fake lines in the sand. Divide and Conquer. Like they always do.

Now you got Sunak, that ex-clown Boris Johnson and who knows who is the next incompetent cabrón PM that is pulled out of their 10 Downing Street smelly trash bin from that trashy party Toryland. I have no idea. But they should be ashamed of the quality of leadership the UK has produced these last few years. Liz Truss who laste how long? And Boris clown who partied during COVID and Blair kissing Bush Jr ass during the Gulf war and sending British men to die and leave chaos behind. Whatever.

Where is all the money these imperialist assholes you LOVE Rich.....for the average man who like you has to work for a living and survive those high energy bills in that cold ass rock otherwise known as Albion? ¿Dónde está el dinero? Where is the money...show me the money that supposedly if all that elitist crap moves from the UK were supposed to do for the UK men and women? No? You remain callado?


Just admit that the elite in your nation are awful pieces of shit that do nothing good for the average worker in the UK and call it a day.

Iraq is not going to save you from those total what-is-that-word that you use? Oh yes...CRETIN. Nothing is going to save you from that Tory Cretin leadership. They are gonna sink you folks fast. Enjoy it. And when those Middle Eastern extremists destroy the UK do not say it came out of nowhere. It came out of all that long history of sticking your nose in Middle Eastern political life for some Lloyd's of London and East Indian Type bankster mafiosos from the UK to get wealthy. You pay the price. They laugh all the way to the bank. Enjoy that stupid reality that you back. I would never do that kind of shitty submission to the powers that be Rich. I am allergic to such submissiveness to the overlords.

What is evil in all this? The ones who refuse to recognize evil when they see it.

[Rich]

The Middle East has been intervened with for many years since and before WWI. So all this bullshit you spout Rich is just that. Bullshit.

The UK had to secure their petrol. So the Middle East is where they went to manipulate and create fake states and draw fake lines in the sand. Divide and Conquer. Like they always do.

Iraq is the origin of western civilisation, by which we mean the civilisation of the north west of the old world. Iraq was part of the Hellenistic world and civisation. The Muslims are the alien occupiers of this land.

However we are where we are and we were where were in 2003. Bush and Blair liberated the Shia and the Kurds from the oppression of Saddam;s regime, from three quarters of century of Sunny Arab tyranny and in the case of the Shia hundreds of years of Sunni oppressor rule. The liberation of 2003 allowed the Shia Arabs of the south and centre of Iraq, where most of the population lives to start developing an independent sovereign nation state. That won't all happen in a day, but there could be no progress while Saddam and his clan remained in charge.

The Cultural Marxist is filled with a demented hatred. When he sees a Sunni Arab Muslim going into a Shia market place and blowing up Shia women and chldren, he immediately blames western infidels. The West didn't divide Muslims, they been divided since the start. Mohammad was barely cold in his grave before his companions started slaughtering each other.

[Tainari88]

Iraq is the origin of western civilisation, by which we mean the civilisation of the north west of the old world. Iraq was part of the Hellenistic world and civisation. The Muslims are the alien occupiers of this land.

However we are where we are and we were where were in 2003. Bush and Blair liberated the Shia and the Kurds from the oppression of Saddam;s regime, from three quarters of century of Sunny Arab tyranny and in the case of the Shia hundreds of years of Sunni oppressor rule. The liberation of 2003 allowed the Shia Arabs of the south and centre of Iraq, where most of the population lives to start developing an independent sovereign nation state. That won't all happen in a day, but there could be no progress while Saddam and his clan remained in charge.

The Cultural Marxist is filled with a demented hatred. When he sees a Sunni Arab Muslim going into a Shia market place and blowing up Shia women and chldren, he immediately blames western infidels. The West didn't divide Muslims, they been divided since the start. Mohammad was barely cold in his grave before his companions started slaughtering each other.

Rich, do you see human beings in the Muslims? Yes or no?

Europe is very much the culture of the knife or the culture of war. How many wars has Europe seen Señor Rich? How many Englishmen have died in wars with France and Spain and Germany? And others? Especially those little pesky troubles in Northern Ireland and Michael Collins and his ilk.

Lol.

I see humans. Not those freaky barbarians taking over the land of Iraq and Mohammed, and etc. the ones who are so different than the English that they are on another universe. We the civilized and they the barbaric.

What is civilized about crucifying people for example? The Romans did it. And I find the English obsessed with Roman culture. i can literally understand an Italian when they are talking. And I do not speak Italian. Simply because Spanish is very much a related language and the Roman Catholic tradition in Spain is almost as strong as the cultural influence from Italy and the Vatican.

Yet England has very different roots culturally and linguistically from Rome. Yet you always as a culture love to think of yourselves as legacy inheritors of the Romans or the Mediterraneans. You are in certain ways but culturally you sure are not. At all.

I have never been to Europe Rich. Not even once. @Potemkin, has tried to convince me to go for a visit eh? Lol. I think he likes warm beaches more than cold ass water from those Scottish beaches eh?

What I do know Rich is that using the excuse of what has happened in other lands and cultures before the English interventions for monetary or geopolitical gain as an excuse to destabilize a nation in order to take resources that are needed by the English government or business capitalist investors is a very poor excuse to commit violence and hold up as an example for the world to follow over the long run.

All true things start with being truthful with your own self, then your own city and communities and your own culture and your own nation. And failing to deal with the lacks in your own society in order to only serve the interests of a bloated elite who do not need more corrupt-based power is not really doing much for English society in the long run.

That is just me. The humanist international socialist who happens to be Puerto Rican on a UK-based international politics website owned by a Greek man. Lol.

I do not have first hand experience of English people en masse. I have met them over the years here or there. Some from the ruling class, some from the middle class and none from the working class. So I ask Potemkin about it. He tells me some things.

He has always treated me like an equal. A great quality to have.

The right leaning British ones never have on this website. That tells you something eh? It tells me a lot.