Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[US Foreign Policy] Talk about the Foreign Policy of the United States

18788909293

Posts

  • JepheryJephery Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    jothki wrote: »
    I don't get why peace with North Korea should be contingent on them not seeking nuclear weapons. Shouldn't it be contingent upon us not wanting to attack them unless they commit an act of war first, and them not wanting to attack us unless we commit an act of war first? I'm pretty sure that's how peace works.

    For all practical purposes, we are at peace. Whats being negotiated is normalization of relations - diplomacy, travel, and trade. A formal peace is the first step on the road to that. North Korea is the last place we should be normalizing relations with.

    With the PRC getting away with genocide right now with barely any objection from anyone in the international community, I really don't see much hope for human progress globally. North Korea being allowed to modernize while still being a totalitarian state will just be another item on the shit list for the world I guess.

    Jephery on
    }
    "Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
    ElldrenOghulkshrykeLordSolarMachariusElvenshaeFANTOMASGennenalyse RuebenKamar
  • skyknytskyknyt Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Jephery wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    I don't get why peace with North Korea should be contingent on them not seeking nuclear weapons. Shouldn't it be contingent upon us not wanting to attack them unless they commit an act of war first, and them not wanting to attack us unless we commit an act of war first? I'm pretty sure that's how peace works.

    For all practical purposes, we are at peace. Whats being negotiated is normalization of relations - diplomacy, travel, and trade. A formal peace is the first step on the road to that. North Korea is the last place we should be normalizing relations with.

    With the PRC getting away with genocide right now with barely any objection from anyone in the international community, I really don't see much hope for human progress globally. North Korea being allowed to modernize while still being a totalitarian state will just be another item on the shit list for the world I guess.

    Literally everything you're saying here could be mirrored with the US and Saudi Arabia committing genocide in Yemen. Why on earth should anyone take the US seriously while our totalitarian client state starves millions of people.

    Tycho wrote:
    [skyknyt's writing] is like come kind of code that, when comprehended, unfolds into madness in the mind of the reader.
    PSN: skyknyt, Steam: skyknyt, Blizz: skyknyt#1160
    YamiB.
  • JepheryJephery Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    skyknyt wrote: »
    Jephery wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    I don't get why peace with North Korea should be contingent on them not seeking nuclear weapons. Shouldn't it be contingent upon us not wanting to attack them unless they commit an act of war first, and them not wanting to attack us unless we commit an act of war first? I'm pretty sure that's how peace works.

    For all practical purposes, we are at peace. Whats being negotiated is normalization of relations - diplomacy, travel, and trade. A formal peace is the first step on the road to that. North Korea is the last place we should be normalizing relations with.

    With the PRC getting away with genocide right now with barely any objection from anyone in the international community, I really don't see much hope for human progress globally. North Korea being allowed to modernize while still being a totalitarian state will just be another item on the shit list for the world I guess.

    Literally everything you're saying here could be mirrored with the US and Saudi Arabia committing genocide in Yemen. Why on earth should anyone take the US seriously while our totalitarian client state starves millions of people.

    Yeah I'd like to send the Saudi royal family to hell too. The fact that globalization economically entrenched us with utterly immoral actors is one of my core grievances with the way things are.

    The fact is that, the West owes its standard of living to being on top of a system of global economic abuse that Western economists and philosophers thought would be alleviated by liberal market forces, but have instead in reality been made worse and worse. Adding North Korea to the list of abusive actors free to engage in global trade continues to send us in the wrong direction.

    The worst part is that we're on the edge of being kicked off the top of the pyramid by the PRC, and we gave them the opportunity to do it. A moral rot we let into our economic system that has spread unchecked.

    Its the replacement of a system that at least nominally aspired to greater human rights and freedoms by one that only cares for stability and exchange without any regard for human dignity. It is a regression of all human progress.

    Jephery on
    }
    "Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
    GaddezMrVyngaardGennenalyse Rueben
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    In other news, Illhan Omar is facing an all directions attack for pointing out that AIPAC buys off US Congressmen and women.



    Even Chelsea Clinton is getting in on it.

    Are they mad because she's wrong or because she's right?

    Eddy
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    I don't think that saying a lobbying group will advocate for a certain position is crazy talk. Neither is the fact that people and groups will donate money to politicians that they think will advance their interests.

    Gnome-InterruptusJulius
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    I don't think that saying a lobbying group will advocate for a certain position is crazy talk. Neither is the fact that people and groups will donate money to politicians that they think will advance their interests.

    The debate might hinge around the acceptability of allowing lobbyists for a foreign nation to have such influence.

    Moridin889ThawmusElvenshaeYoutubedispatch.oMegaMekBullheadGennenalyse Rueben
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    V1m wrote: »
    daveNYC wrote: »
    I don't think that saying a lobbying group will advocate for a certain position is crazy talk. Neither is the fact that people and groups will donate money to politicians that they think will advance their interests.

    The debate might hinge around the acceptability of allowing lobbyists for a foreign nation to have such influence.

    Quite. At least in Israel's case, they're doing it out in the open, AIPAC basically does what it says on the tin. Now compare that to the various think tanks around DC that run on Saudi money or the fact finding tours that politicians go on that I'm sure don't involve getting wined and dined in five-star hotels.

    ThawmusV1mDuke 2.0YoutubeFencingsaxMegaMekGennenalyse Rueben
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    I think the problem is associating a poltical lobbying group with antismetiism

    HevachElvenshaeNo-QuarterBullhead
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    Do we think a canceled exercise or two is seriously going to impact our ability to operate there? Do we really expect North Korea to negotiate while we're practicing mass murder next door?

    Exercises aren't just about testing and training the troops. Theyre also about demonstrating to potential targets without giving away too much material information. This is why they're not secret and outcomes of competitive ones are usually public - a few years back the media talked about a French ship "embarrassing" US submarines by wiping out a number of them untouched in a war game, but the point of that was to let the world know that NATO had a new sub hunter that could flawlessly find and hit an attack sub whose stealth capabilities were by now well known to the world, so that everyone would look at their sub fleet and know better than get it near one.

    With rational actors (And NK plays it up but has not been half as irrational as they act) keeping the outcome of armed conflict on the table like that helps keep actual conflict off.

    Hevach on
    electricitylikesmejmcdonaldElvenshaeFencingsax
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    AIPAC have got to have it both ways for a long time: they have lobbied for essentially the worst of rightwing israeli policy, while portraying themselves to the U.S. domestic audience as the advocate for all that is Right and Good about our relationship with israel. The danger for them is their cause beginning to appear as though it's actually a contested, partisan issue, which is why any critic has to be attacked immediately not just for being wrong but for being an idiotic crank

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
    TL DRElvenshaeJayKaosGnome-InterruptusYoutubeCommander ZoomBigJoeMshrykePLAMrMisterElldrenYamiB.FencingsaxBhowPreacherdispatch.oDarkPrimusjmcdonaldSmrtnikMegaMekCptKemzikBullheadAresProphettinwhiskersJuliusKamar
  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    7okv5p2y2di6.png

    Ted Cruz is a Republican Senator

    Of course this is a bipartisan issue, with Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer standing apart as one of the most extreme voices in support of the apartheid government in Israel, both blaming Palestinians for escalating violence because they 'don't believe in the Torah' and pushing to make boycotting Israel illegal in an AIPAC-produced piece of legislation.

    PLAJulius
  • grumblethorngrumblethorn Registered User regular
    She's on point about AIPAC, but lobbying for multi national corporations that ignore nationalism is as corrupting as a nation state lobbying.

  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    TL DR wrote: »
    7okv5p2y2di6.png

    Ted Cruz is a Republican Senator

    Of course this is a bipartisan issue, with Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer standing apart as one of the most extreme voices in support of the apartheid government in Israel, both blaming Palestinians for escalating violence because they 'don't believe in the Torah' and pushing to make boycotting Israel illegal in an AIPAC-produced piece of legislation.

    Ummm... So I guess Ted Cruz doesn’t understand that Benjamins refers to Benjamin Franklin, whose face is on a hundred dollar bill, and not some random Jewish guy named Benjamin?

  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    I don't think he was confused on that point.

    ThawmusmilskiCommander ZoomSleepKevin CristGnome-InterruptusKoopahTroopahYamiB.MrVyngaardFencingsaxIlpalaMegaMekDuke 2.0skyknytCentipede DamascusFryJuliusGennenalyse RuebenSkeith
  • milskimilski Their Will comes, at last, to Earth, to the Neath, as a storm crosses the sea. Registered User regular
    TL DR wrote: »
    7okv5p2y2di6.png

    Ted Cruz is a Republican Senator

    Of course this is a bipartisan issue, with Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer standing apart as one of the most extreme voices in support of the apartheid government in Israel, both blaming Palestinians for escalating violence because they 'don't believe in the Torah' and pushing to make boycotting Israel illegal in an AIPAC-produced piece of legislation.

    Ummm... So I guess Ted Cruz doesn’t understand that Benjamins refers to Benjamin Franklin, whose face is on a hundred dollar bill, and not some random Jewish guy named Benjamin?

    To make it clear here, Ted Cruz's point was as follows:

    Ilhan Omar tweets about a Jewish PAC taking actions motivated solely by money.

    Jewish people are stereotyped as caring excessively about money.

    Therefore, Omar is being anti-semitic by accusing a Jewish group of caring about money.

    High, cold, eternal, immobile, minuscule. You endure; you burn.
    JayKaosSleepElldrenTicaldfjamFencingsaxMild Confusiondispatch.oCentipede DamascusMoridin889Gennenalyse Rueben
  • grumblethorngrumblethorn Registered User regular
    She's anti-semitic for her support of anti-semites.

  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    Ah I misread him as responding to her text by saying “all about the Benjamans” was itself specifically an old antisemitic slander.

    Jealous Deva on
  • BigJoeMBigJoeM Registered User regular
    She's anti-semitic for her support of anti-semites.

    Considering Israel a bad actor on the world stage and wanting to limit its influence on us politicians is not antisemitic.

    Conflating support of the right wing Zionist regime in Israel with support of the Jewish people actually encourages antisemitism.

    Gnome-InterruptusNo-QuarterSleepshrykeVishNubViskodYamiB.MrVyngaardMorganVTNTrooperFencingsaxJepheryCommander ZoomJragghendispatch.ojmcdonaldRedTideYoutubeMegaMekDuke 2.0ForarBeef AvengerJaysonFourskyknytFANTOMAStinwhiskersGennenalyse RuebenSkeithKamar
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    She's anti-semitic for her support of anti-semites.

    Which anti-semites is she supporting?

    shryke on
    SleepA Dabble Of TheloniusGaddezFencingsaxKaputaDarkPrimusjmcdonaldYoutubeMegaMekDuke 2.0Kamar
  • P10P10 An Idiot With Low IQ Registered User regular
    AIPAC doesn't give money to candidates directly so I have no idea where those numbers posted to own Ted Cruz came from.

    Shameful pursuits and utterly stupid opinions
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    AIPAC have got to have it both ways for a long time: they have lobbied for essentially the worst of rightwing israeli policy, while portraying themselves to the U.S. domestic audience as the advocate for all that is Right and Good about our relationship with israel. The danger for them is their cause beginning to appear as though it's actually a contested, partisan issue, which is why any critic has to be attacked immediately not just for being wrong but for being an idiotic crank

    It's more then that. AIPAC is committed to making support for Israel not a political issue at all. They strive and largely succeed at making it a bedrock foundation of american politics, like the word "freedom" or american exceptionalism. They want to exert influence on all politicians without it even looking like they are a lobbying group at all. (see - the shock at someone not going on the trip they send every congressperson on to Israel) Any comment on the very fact that AIPAC and the Pro-Israel lobby even exists must be attacked with full force because the very idea that they actually lobby at all, that they actually influence politicians, threatens the position they strive to maintain.

    BigJoeMNSDFRandSleepMrVyngaardTL DRFencingsaxCommander ZoomGnome-InterruptusMrMisterdaveNYCYoutubeMegaMekDuke 2.0tinwhiskersGennenalyse RuebenKamar
  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    P10 wrote: »
    AIPAC doesn't give money to candidates directly so I have no idea where those numbers posted to own Ted Cruz came from.

    Something called the Center For Responsive Politics

    https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=Q05 &cycle=2018&recipdetail=S&Mem=Y&sortorder=U

  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    Pelosi doin a yasskween by clamping down hard on forbidden thought

    Styrofoam SammichYamiB.KaputaMrMisterMegaMekskyknyt
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    Is very interesting to see Pelosi reigning in the attempts to go against foreign policy orthodoxy from a part of the younger generation of Congress.

    Feels that the Dem party hasn't had a boiling over moment like the GOP had when the base was faced with the humilliation of having a Bush representing them after Bush Jr. Pelosi so far has been able to hold the reigns, but we'll see what happens.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    Man, they threw her under the bus

    BhowMild ConfusionCogbrynhrtmnCommander ZoomTL DRBigJoeMGnome-InterruptusKaputaA Dabble Of Theloniusdispatch.oSolarDarkPrimusMrMisterFeloniousmozSmrtnikMagellCrimson KingMegaMekDuke 2.0DacArdolJaysonFourskyknytBullheadRawkking GoodguyKruiteTravantinwhiskersJohn C. TurbineJuliusSkeithKamar
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    I don't know wtf "yasskween" is supposed to be but there's nothing surprising here. The Israeli lobby is mostly non-partisan and generally dislikes people like Bibi getting in the way of that.

    Pelosi is probably representing the vast majority of the caucus here.

    This is one of the good things about getting more diverse voices into government though. People start saying new things.

    shryke on
    Fencingsaxdispatch.oYoutubeMegaMekkimeQanamilGennenalyse RuebenKamar
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    US foreign policy is basically bipartisan

    Julius
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Josh Marshall has thoughts on that whole situation. Her choice of language was probably unfortunate.



    And I think this statement from her is reasonable.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    CogElvenshaebrynhrtmnreVerseCommander ZoomGnome-Interruptusdispatch.ojmcdonaldP10GaddezYoutubeElldrenemp123Duke 2.0kimeJaysonFourQanamilRawkking GoodguyAimabotkinGennenalyse RuebenSkeith
  • OghulkOghulk biggest externality low-energy economistRegistered User regular
    I mean people here may not think so but when I read her tweet about Benjamins I immediately thought it was kinda using a stereotype

    raoADVy.png
  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User, Moderator mod
    Let's avoid making this into a discussion about Democrats vs Democrats instead of a discussion about actual foreign policy.

  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    Man, they threw her under the bus

    I think this also represents a greater failure of the Left as represented in US politics: a lack of cohesive foreign policy platform. Ideally, Omar would have had immediate support from AOC, Sanders, etc and forced a prolonged to-do that publicized the shameful and bipartisan nature of US-Israel relations.

    Commander ZoomStyrofoam SammichYamiB.KaputaMrMisterYoutubeCrimson KingMegaMekMrVyngaardJohn C. TurbineKamar
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    But we won't, because third rails. Touch at your peril.

    Commander Zoom on
    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    shrykeTicaldfjamYoutubeSmrtnikKamar
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    Honestly it’s a bit funny since former majority leader Kevin McCarthy tweeted essentially the same thing about Jewish interests influencing politics but dressed it up with a bit more dog-whistling and no one really made any kind of big deal about it at all.


    Edit: Sorry didn’t see mod post

    Jealous Deva on
    shrykeYoutube
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    That's the pathetic state of anti-semitism in the US though. Mention Jews and money in any context whatsoever and the liberals will join with people peddling Soros conspiracies to condemn you but propping up a right wing lobbying group as standing for all Jews is just fine.

    95% of the anti bigotry in this country is just performative nonsense.

    YamiB.TL DRGnome-InterruptusA Dabble Of Theloniusdispatch.oSleepMrMisterBlackDragon480SmrtnikMegaMekDuke 2.0JaysonFourskyknyttinwhiskersabotkinJuliusSkeithKamar
  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    edited February 11
    That's the pathetic state of anti-semitism in the US though. Mention Jews and money in any context whatsoever and the liberals will join with people peddling Soros conspiracies to condemn you but propping up a right wing lobbying group as standing for all Jews is just fine.

    95% of the anti bigotry in this country is just performative nonsense.

    It speaks to the effectiveness of anti-semite as a smear - nobody knows what it is, but if someone has politics that are otherwise broadly appealing, then it's one of the easier ways to smear them as Bad, Actually. This is visible in the recent shift in the UK from trying to smear Corbyn as sexist to criticizing him as anti-semitic, but of course the argument gets reliably brought out whenever there's criticism of the state of Israel, notwithstanding that it's problematic to say the least to conflate Jewish people with the existence and actions of the Israeli state. Of course to make this way worse, it all exists in a context in which the insane death cult that is modern Evangelical political organizations view Israel as necessary to fulfill the apocalypse as depicted in Revelations, which means that a tidy solution is not at all forthcoming.

    TL DR on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    TL DR wrote: »
    That's the pathetic state of anti-semitism in the US though. Mention Jews and money in any context whatsoever and the liberals will join with people peddling Soros conspiracies to condemn you but propping up a right wing lobbying group as standing for all Jews is just fine.

    95% of the anti bigotry in this country is just performative nonsense.

    It speaks to the effectiveness of anti-semite as a smear - nobody knows what it is, but if someone has politics that are otherwise broadly appealing, then it's one of the easier ways to smear them as Bad, Actually. This is visible in the recent shift in the UK from trying to smear Corbyn as sexist to criticizing him as anti-semitic, but of course the argument gets reliably brought out whenever there's criticism of the state of Israel, notwithstanding that it's problematic to say the least to conflate Jewish people with the existence and actions of the Israeli state. Of course to make this way worse, it all exists in a context in which the insane death cult that is modern Evangelical political organizations view Israel as necessary to fulfill the apocalypse as depicted in Revelations, which means that a tidy solution is not at all forthcoming.

    Comparing this to the issues Labour and Corbyn have had with anti-semitism is ridiculous (but that's for another thread). For one, Omar's statements weren't actually anti-semitic, though one could read them as such if one squinted hard enough.

    I think her apology does a good job of addressing the core criticism while redirecting back to the actual message. I doubt the redirect will make any waves in the news cycle though.

    ElvenshaeGnome-InterruptusA Dabble Of TheloniusFencingsaxjmcdonalddispatch.oYoutubeElldrenBlackDragon480OneAngryPossumMegaMekDuke 2.0kimeMrVyngaardMoridin889abotkinGennenalyse RuebenKamar
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    Even Bernie is really pro-Israel

    Pro-Israel policy isn't partisan in the US.

    Actually tbh is foreign policy even partisan in the US? I don't think it is at all. Clinton as the Secretary of State was as least as hawkish as a lot of red state Senators I feel

    Obama was notable not because he was a Democrat but because he rejected a lot of the cross-party FP commonly held views. And he wasn't exactly notable.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    Even Bernie is really pro-Israel

    Pro-Israel policy isn't partisan in the US.

    Actually tbh is foreign policy even partisan in the US? I don't think it is at all. Clinton as the Secretary of State was as least as hawkish as a lot of red state Senators I feel

    Obama was notable not because he was a Democrat but because he rejected a lot of the cross-party FP commonly held views. And he wasn't exactly notable.

    Foreign policy is fairly partisan in the US. It's just partisan within certain parameters. Which is hardly uniquely american or unique to foreign policy.

    Gnome-InterruptusFencingsaxElldrenmrondeauMegaMekkimeElvenshaeGennenalyse Rueben
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    Even Bernie is really pro-Israel

    Pro-Israel policy isn't partisan in the US.

    Actually tbh is foreign policy even partisan in the US? I don't think it is at all. Clinton as the Secretary of State was as least as hawkish as a lot of red state Senators I feel

    Obama was notable not because he was a Democrat but because he rejected a lot of the cross-party FP commonly held views. And he wasn't exactly notable.

    Foreign policy is fairly partisan in the US. It's just partisan within certain parameters. Which is hardly uniquely american or unique to foreign policy.

    That's....uh

    YamiB.Julius
  • KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited February 11
    The part that disturbs me is that, with Omar as the only vocal critic of Israel in Congress (or one of like two if one of the other newbies is saying similar things and I missed it), Pelosi joining Cruz to criticize her looks like the establishment attempting to draw a red line on what foreign policy views are acceptable. My fear is that this may be effective in dissuading Omar or similarly-minded Democrats from making such criticisms again. Which makes me pessimistic about the US's likelihood of changing it's policy toward Israel and Palestine anytime soon.

    Kaputa on
    TicaldfjamHamHamJBhowYoutubeCommander ZoomDuke 2.0MegaMekYamiB.MrVyngaardtinwhiskersNo-QuarterbrynhrtmnabotkinKamar
Sign In or Register to comment.