White House CNN Correspondent Jeremy Diamond: If Palestinian leaders reject this proposal, then Kushner says "they're going to screw up another opportunity, like they’ve screwed up every other opportunity that they’ve had in their existence."
Trump said he wanted his peace plan to be a "win/win". Where is the win for the Palestinians?
Jared Kushner: "He's delivered for the Palestinians a pathway to a state, a contiguous territory and the conditions where they can earn their way to their independence, their dignity."
Kushner does not know what contiguous means
Earn their way to independance?
Like holy shit, there needs to be a term for patronizing that is more intense and focused then this; Little hand german speakers?
The US military News site Stars and Stripes are reporting that those troops who weren’t injured by Iranian rocket fire at all who then became 11 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries who then became 34 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries have now became 64 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries.
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon announced Thursday that 64 American troops sustained mild traumatic brain injuries as a result of the Iranian missile strikes on two military bases in Iraq, once again revising how many service members were hurt in the Jan. 8 attack.
“The diagnosis we have so far to date is mild traumatic brain injury,” Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at the Pentagon, noting the conditions of the injuries could change over time. “Your brain is a very fragile part of your body. The unseen wounds of war can be serious and not serious. It depends on the individual and their proximity to the blast.”
Of the 64 troops diagnosed with TBI, 39 troops were treated and returned to duty.
So luckily it sounds like most of the injuries were relatively mild, but it does seem that something fairly dramatic happened at one of the bases in Iraq at least.
The US military News site Stars and Stripes are reporting that those troops who weren’t injured by Iranian rocket fire at all who then became 11 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries who then became 34 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries have now became 64 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries.
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon announced Thursday that 64 American troops sustained mild traumatic brain injuries as a result of the Iranian missile strikes on two military bases in Iraq, once again revising how many service members were hurt in the Jan. 8 attack.
“The diagnosis we have so far to date is mild traumatic brain injury,” Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at the Pentagon, noting the conditions of the injuries could change over time. “Your brain is a very fragile part of your body. The unseen wounds of war can be serious and not serious. It depends on the individual and their proximity to the blast.”
Of the 64 troops diagnosed with TBI, 39 troops were treated and returned to duty.
So luckily it sounds like most of the injuries were relatively mild, but it does seem that something fairly dramatic happened at one of the bases in Iraq at least.
"Of the 64 troops diagnosed with TBI, 39 troops were treated and returned to duty."
Meaning 25 troops diagnosed with TBI have NOT been returned to duty, more than three weeks after the attack.
That shouldn't be understated. These 25 servicemembers were injured seriously enough that three weeks later they're STILL inactive.
The US military News site Stars and Stripes are reporting that those troops who weren’t injured by Iranian rocket fire at all who then became 11 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries who then became 34 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries have now became 64 soldiers with traumatic brain injuries.
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon announced Thursday that 64 American troops sustained mild traumatic brain injuries as a result of the Iranian missile strikes on two military bases in Iraq, once again revising how many service members were hurt in the Jan. 8 attack.
“The diagnosis we have so far to date is mild traumatic brain injury,” Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at the Pentagon, noting the conditions of the injuries could change over time. “Your brain is a very fragile part of your body. The unseen wounds of war can be serious and not serious. It depends on the individual and their proximity to the blast.”
Of the 64 troops diagnosed with TBI, 39 troops were treated and returned to duty.
So luckily it sounds like most of the injuries were relatively mild, but it does seem that something fairly dramatic happened at one of the bases in Iraq at least.
"Of the 64 troops diagnosed with TBI, 39 troops were treated and returned to duty."
Meaning 25 troops diagnosed with TBI have NOT been returned to duty, more than three weeks after the attack.
That shouldn't be understated. These 25 servicemembers were injured seriously enough that three weeks later they're STILL inactive.
Yeah, something pretty bad must have gone down. Given head injuries are all that have been mentioned I’ve wondered if maybe part of a ceiling or roof collapsed.
A shockwave can be very bad for soft tissues. Depending of where they were the brain could have been subjected to all sorts of damage from the blasts. I also takes a bit of time for that damage to become apparent and can be pretty severe.
Hey guys, I wonder if your galaxy sized brains could find find a different clever historical comparison for Israel’s recent actions.
The Romans?
At least the Romans provided sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health.
The Assyrians?
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
If Bibi goes ahead and pulls the trigger on annexation Sunday I'll be perfectly fine comparing Israel's behavior to the Nasionale Party. Not that their behavior wasn't comparable before, but there was the slight possibility that they might change course. Annexation would lock them in on a path where eventually they either are Jewish or Democratic, but not both.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
If Bibi goes ahead and pulls the trigger on annexation Sunday I'll be perfectly fine comparing Israel's behavior to the Nasionale Party. Not that their behavior wasn't comparable before, but there was the slight possibility that they might change course. Annexation would lock them in on a path where eventually they either are Jewish or Democratic, but not both.
Edward Wong of the New York Times: BREAKING: Pompeo said after meeting w/ Zelensky in Kyiv that US supports Ukraine against Russian aggression. But he said there are no plans for Zelensky to visit Trump at the White House — which Zelensky says he wants. It’d be an important signal to Putin.
I was going to compare it to 19th century British imperialism, but the British generally allowed their native vassal princes to maintain a standing army
Edward Wong of the New York Times: BREAKING: Pompeo said after meeting w/ Zelensky in Kyiv that US supports Ukraine against Russian aggression. But he said there are no plans for Zelensky to visit Trump at the White House — which Zelensky says he wants. It’d be an important signal to Putin.
It's funny, because I get the impression that pence understands this whole thing with russia is bullshit, but he has about as much say in whitehouse politics as Baron trump.
A shockwave can be very bad for soft tissues. Depending of where they were the brain could have been subjected to all sorts of damage from the blasts. I also takes a bit of time for that damage to become apparent and can be pretty severe.
Hence the origin of the term "shell shock."
Back in the First World War they were originally trying to define psychological symptoms for what we'd now recognize as PTSD by rooting them in terms of physical injury, since back then psychology and medicine in general were ... not terribly great at interpreting mental trauma (and weren't sure that was even a thing, really). Despite not having the right connection to that specific set of symptoms, though, they weren't off base on the broader assumption that constantly getting jarred around by explosive overpressure had to be doing something bad to the brain.
turns out being subjected to high intensity bombardment for days or weeks on end is bad for your physical and mental health (even if you're never actually hit).
who knew?
I don't suppose anyone knows what would happen if specific political parties made deals with nations? I assume this is massively illegal?
The Logan Act criminalizes unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign countries currently involved in a dispute with the United States; that would include political parties and even executive-branch government officials who aren't supposed to be doing the negotiating. If, to use the thread's recent hot potato, a future Democratic administration decided to come down on Israel's apartheid policies, there would Be A Dispute, and the absolutely inevitable attempt by the Republicans to directly work with Tel Aviv over the resultant fiasco would fall afoul of the law.
I don't know if there's anything regulating more general contexts - private individuals bounce between countries on causes all the time after all, with Greta Thunberg's recent visits to the US and Canada as a super obvious example. If an unauthorized government official pushed things too far or too obviously, between the Logan Act, the Hatch Act and other things like espionage legislation there would probably be something a sufficiently irritated government could work with to discourage it.
Officeholders also have their various oaths which that sort of thing would blur or violate outright, but I'm not sure if there's anything specific that can be done to forsworn politicians, if just because there'd be rather fewer of them these days otherwise.
I don't suppose anyone knows what would happen if specific political parties made deals with nations? I assume this is massively illegal?
The Logan Act criminalizes unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign countries currently involved in a dispute with the United States; that would include political parties and even executive-branch government officials who aren't supposed to be doing the negotiating. If, to use the thread's recent hot potato, a future Democratic administration decided to come down on Israel's apartheid policies, there would Be A Dispute, and the absolutely inevitable attempt by the Republicans to directly work with Tel Aviv over the resultant fiasco would fall afoul of the law.
I don't know if there's anything regulating more general contexts - private individuals bounce between countries on causes all the time after all, with Greta Thunberg's recent visits to the US and Canada as a super obvious example. If an unauthorized government official pushed things too far or too obviously, between the Logan Act, the Hatch Act and other things like espionage legislation there would probably be something a sufficiently irritated government could work with to discourage it.
Officeholders also have their various oaths which that sort of thing would blur or violate outright, but I'm not sure if there's anything specific that can be done to forsworn politicians, if just because there'd be rather fewer of them these days otherwise.
Didn't stop Trump begging the Russians for help when he was just the nominee. And now, well... I imagine he's already made the call.
Foreign Policy has an article about how our Ambassadors who are political appointees with no experience or skill have been dismissing their Deputy Chiefs of Mission who in these cases are the ones that actually run and manage these embassies.
“There is this implicit assumption that the career people can’t be trusted, which is both very corrosive to our institution, but also very unfair and inaccurate. The signal that sends to the career staff is really, really harmful,” said another.
They open with this specific example.
Lana Marks is a successful fashion designer and member of U.S. President Donald Trump’s private Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. Though she has no prior diplomatic experience, Marks is also Trump’s ambassador to South Africa, and last month she forced out her second in command, the veteran career foreign service officer David Young. According to multiple current and former officials familiar with the matter, the issue arose following Marks’s attempts to elevate her son to a senior role in the embassy, an apparent violation of State Department rules.
Foreign Policy has an article about how our Ambassadors who are political appointees with no experience or skill have been dismissing their Deputy Chiefs of Mission who in these cases are the ones that actually run and manage these embassies.
“There is this implicit assumption that the career people can’t be trusted, which is both very corrosive to our institution, but also very unfair and inaccurate. The signal that sends to the career staff is really, really harmful,” said another.
They open with this specific example.
Lana Marks is a successful fashion designer and member of U.S. President Donald Trump’s private Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. Though she has no prior diplomatic experience, Marks is also Trump’s ambassador to South Africa, and last month she forced out her second in command, the veteran career foreign service officer David Young. According to multiple current and former officials familiar with the matter, the issue arose following Marks’s attempts to elevate her son to a senior role in the embassy, an apparent violation of State Department rules.
Nepotism? In Trump's government? Sounds a little far-fetched to me. :rotate:
Sic transit gloria mundi.
+22
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
edited February 2020
In its over 200 year history no one has ever been prosecuted for violating the Logan act.
They fear another Apple situation- only this time, it's more aimed at U.S. citizens.
If Huawei owns 5G, this administration is freaking out that it means the Chinese will be able to use 5G to hack everything we own because it'll be full of backdoors and holes for Chinese hackers, and besides, Donnie will throw a tantrum if he doesn't get to do much the same, too. With a stake in Nokia and Ericsson, they can request a sooper seekrit guvrnment backdoor be put in so they can look into anybody's phone they want to at any time, I imagine.
In short, Huawei could have some small semblance of power, and anybody who's not 'murican in the States with any power absolutely scares the hell out of this administration.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
+4
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
They fear another Apple situation- only this time, it's more aimed at U.S. citizens.
If Huawei owns 5G, this administration is freaking out that it means the Chinese will be able to use 5G to hack everything we own because it'll be full of backdoors and holes for Chinese hackers, and besides, Donnie will throw a tantrum if he doesn't get to do much the same, too. With a stake in Nokia and Ericsson, they can request a sooper seekrit guvrnment backdoor be put in so they can look into anybody's phone they want to at any time, I imagine.
In short, Huawei could have some small semblance of power, and anybody who's not 'murican in the States with any power absolutely scares the hell out of this administration.
I mean, it's not like the concern isn't realistic.
Posts
It sounds better in the original Hebrew.
So luckily it sounds like most of the injuries were relatively mild, but it does seem that something fairly dramatic happened at one of the bases in Iraq at least.
"Of the 64 troops diagnosed with TBI, 39 troops were treated and returned to duty."
Meaning 25 troops diagnosed with TBI have NOT been returned to duty, more than three weeks after the attack.
That shouldn't be understated. These 25 servicemembers were injured seriously enough that three weeks later they're STILL inactive.
Yeah, something pretty bad must have gone down. Given head injuries are all that have been mentioned I’ve wondered if maybe part of a ceiling or roof collapsed.
Yeah.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
The Romans?
At least the Romans provided sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health.
The Assyrians?
the proper term is apartheid
they're still punishing him for not delivering their investigations
I was going to suggest the 1 and 3/5 state final solution
MWO: Adamski
Fuckin seriously, guys? Holocaust jokes right after I say thanks but no thanks?
Discuss foreign policy like grown ups or shut up.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
MWO: Adamski
MWO: Adamski
It's funny, because I get the impression that pence understands this whole thing with russia is bullshit, but he has about as much say in whitehouse politics as Baron trump.
Hence the origin of the term "shell shock."
Back in the First World War they were originally trying to define psychological symptoms for what we'd now recognize as PTSD by rooting them in terms of physical injury, since back then psychology and medicine in general were ... not terribly great at interpreting mental trauma (and weren't sure that was even a thing, really). Despite not having the right connection to that specific set of symptoms, though, they weren't off base on the broader assumption that constantly getting jarred around by explosive overpressure had to be doing something bad to the brain.
who knew?
Well, that doesn't seem to be stopping Trump. So...
The Logan Act criminalizes unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign countries currently involved in a dispute with the United States; that would include political parties and even executive-branch government officials who aren't supposed to be doing the negotiating. If, to use the thread's recent hot potato, a future Democratic administration decided to come down on Israel's apartheid policies, there would Be A Dispute, and the absolutely inevitable attempt by the Republicans to directly work with Tel Aviv over the resultant fiasco would fall afoul of the law.
I don't know if there's anything regulating more general contexts - private individuals bounce between countries on causes all the time after all, with Greta Thunberg's recent visits to the US and Canada as a super obvious example. If an unauthorized government official pushed things too far or too obviously, between the Logan Act, the Hatch Act and other things like espionage legislation there would probably be something a sufficiently irritated government could work with to discourage it.
Officeholders also have their various oaths which that sort of thing would blur or violate outright, but I'm not sure if there's anything specific that can be done to forsworn politicians, if just because there'd be rather fewer of them these days otherwise.
Didn't stop Trump begging the Russians for help when he was just the nominee. And now, well... I imagine he's already made the call.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
"It's blatantly illegal" and "the current norms permit anyone to act on that" don't have a lot of Venn overlap lately.
They open with this specific example.
Nepotism? In Trump's government? Sounds a little far-fetched to me. :rotate:
Capitalism = Taking
He said taking, it's pretty straightforward!
It’s not really nationalizing when it’s another nation’s corporations.
More like... Colonization I guess?
He's proposing nationalising them. So, National Socialism.
They fear another Apple situation- only this time, it's more aimed at U.S. citizens.
If Huawei owns 5G, this administration is freaking out that it means the Chinese will be able to use 5G to hack everything we own because it'll be full of backdoors and holes for Chinese hackers, and besides, Donnie will throw a tantrum if he doesn't get to do much the same, too. With a stake in Nokia and Ericsson, they can request a sooper seekrit guvrnment backdoor be put in so they can look into anybody's phone they want to at any time, I imagine.
In short, Huawei could have some small semblance of power, and anybody who's not 'murican in the States with any power absolutely scares the hell out of this administration.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
I mean, it's not like the concern isn't realistic.