Muuuuuuuslim Baaaaaan! But don't call it that!

That Spending is the reason Europeans get their supposed free shit. fucking cheapskates can't even pay their part of the NATO bill, well besides the UK, Estonia, Poland and Greece, Fucking Greece actually pays its part.

All Europeans need to say is Thank You Mr.America for providing me with security and safety so I can be free to act as smug as I want on the internet because I get checks from the government.
Yeah ... like in Ukraine. So save! Piss of the Russians to much, and who do you think will be hit by their shit first? How many tanks can cross the atlantik, Mr. Fantastic.

Better red than dead, is my motto. I will take my nanny state over your neo-liberal US economy. Let us see how Trumps staff will be doing after those 4 years turning the US in an full oligarchy and kleptocracy. Drain the swamp, by throwing aligators in.
 
Last edited:
I remember one of my professors talk about how George W. Bush convinced Ukraine to give up their nuclear weapons because the US would protect them.

And how that would backfire and destroy all US credibility in the region.
 
To be fair,

Even had Ukraine kept their nukes, and gotten them operational, they still need the infrastructure to maintain and, eventually replace them. A very expensive affair to be sure.

Also, Ukraine is not a part of NATO. The Budapest Memorandum language stated that Ukraine, among others, could appeal to the U.N. security council if its sovereignty was under threat. One could argue, were Ukraine part of NATO, the Crimea business could have been avoided completely.

My single, biggest dislike about Trump, is his isolationist stance. Once one is on top, so to speak, one needs to take certain actions to STAY, on top. If we were to actually abandon our allies, that would ruin Americas image and I am sure Russia or China would gladly move in to fulfill this role, taking a bit of revenge along the way.
 
To be fair,

Even had Ukraine kept their nukes, and gotten them operational, they still need the infrastructure to maintain and, eventually replace them. A very expensive affair to be sure.

Also, Ukraine is not a part of NATO. The Budapest Memorandum language stated that Ukraine, among others, could appeal to the U.N. security council if its sovereignty was under threat.

My single, biggest dislike about Trump, is his isolationist stance. Once one is on top, so to speak, one needs to take certain actions to STAY, on top. If we were to actually abandon our allies, that would ruin Americas image and I am sure Russia or China would gladly move in to fulfill this role, taking a bit of revenge along the way.

Obama actually caused some of that in Syria by taking damn near forever to get involved. Ditto Libya.

As I was getting, the earlier defenses about how US military power is part of the reason its strength of economy and influence exists. My major concern is the United States really is nickle and dimeing (except these nickle and dimes are a billion here and a billion there) with its debt having grown to ridiculous levels. We don't have the economy to QUITE sustain the level of military supremacy and social services we do (even though we always choose the military) and it's SLOOWWWWLY adding up.
 
My single, biggest dislike about Trump, is his isolationist stance. Once one is on top, so to speak, one needs to take certain actions to STAY, on top. If we were to actually abandon our allies, that would ruin Americas image and I am sure Russia or China would gladly move in to fulfill this role, taking a bit of revenge along the way.
*Shrugs*
Not even the Roman Empire ruled for ever.
 
I wonder how the hippies over here in the states would feel if the power of the dollar fell and other countries relied on the Ruble or Renminbi, for their strategic reserves?

Would they still feel the same once the dollars power fell and they could no longer afford their spoiled ass lifestyle while wearing Che Guevera T-shirts and Bernie love?

Would the same hippies feel the same if the U.S. were hit with significant sanctions?

Stupid ass isolationist idiots.
 
I wonder how the hippies over here in the states would feel if the power of the dollar fell and other countries relied on the Ruble or Renminbi, for their strategic reserves?

Would they still feel the same once the dollars power fell and they could no longer afford their spoiled ass lifestyle while wearing Che Guevera T-shirts and Bernie love?

Would the same hippies feel the same if the U.S. were hit with significant sanctions?

Stupid ass isolationist idiots.

You're mixing up your politics, @DarkCorp, or at least getting them confused. The hippies in the United States are possibly against military adventurism from the United States and boots on the ground but they're by and large all for the global economy. They're by and large a bunch of millennials who think of China as their ally rather than rival and often chat with people from Iran and Slovakia on the internet while being fairly used to American military aggression being done via robot army or missiles from satellite planning.

It's the rural American mechanic and waitress who isn't at all fond of a globalized economy, about as far from hippies as possible. Honestly, since they're people suffering from Vietnam and who have lost people in the current War on Terror, they're the Trumpeteers asking for less military adventurism more than the hippies. They long for a nonexistent restored American working class with imagined brown people no longer taking their jobs they never lost to them and screw everybody else.

The Republican Party doesn't agree but that doesn't mean the American voter does.

As Bernie is the only socialist on the American Left with any pull, Trump is the only isolationist.
 
The credibility of Bernie Sanders, if not shitty before the election, is complete shit now. Whatever friends he had in the democratic party he alienated and his progressive base has largely thrown in their lot with Jill Stein.

Why else is Bernie the only politician at places like DAPL? He has no political credibility left to LOSE. All he can do is try to gain some, which will be a steep climb.

I agree with you in regards to the illusion that manufacturing will have a robust regrowth in the states. TBH, the U.S. is the empire and citizens of the empire really do not 'manufacture shit'. We like our goods cheap, and that cannot happen unless labor is cheap, PERIOD. A lot of people who voted for Trump are equally confused as to this concept.

Companies, in order to remain competitive, will have to outsource. The corporations of other nations gladly outsource and take advantage of cheap labor while our own are restricted? Our own goods will be more expensive than the competitors out there.

The progressives, as they call themselves, are totally against globalism as a whole.

As I have stated, the left, in general, would have the military close down all bases in foreign lands and tell our allies to go fuck themselves. Bernie, Jill and even Gary have espoused these beliefs during the election.
 
The thing we should be shooting for and call me a wide-eyed idealist is the globalized society where the interconnectively precludes the needs for rulers. Commerce has brought that day a lot closer. That's the one benefit of the transnational megacorp.

And yes, as bad as outsourcing the jobs has been, people forget everything is so fucking cheap in Wallmart because it's made for pennies.

As I have stated, the left, in general, would have the military close down all bases in foreign lands and tell our allies to go fuck themselves. Bernie, Jill and even Gary have espoused these beliefs during the election.

The problem with this is that's the Left as you just described Bernie being, which is the far outlier. The Neo-Cons are all about American hegemony through military power. They just prefer robots and rapid fire movement versus sending people to be shot because that plays poorly at home.

They've also eliminated all respect for borders.

I'd also argue Bernie's credibility is different since he went from the weird senator no one likes to the person a lot of people felt could have won the Presidency. Certainly, he's considered a voice now that he wasn't before.
 
I'm confused, you seem to romanticize the notion of megacorps greatly yet most dystopian settings (Dredd, Robocop, Bladerunner) tend to feature megacorps as this horribly bloated powerhouse that manipulates government organizations into establishing policies that benefit them.

Huxley's Brave New World warned of a society that would be the total opposite of Orwell's 1984. Megacorps would be closer to Huxley's hypothetical world - the people being drowned by sensory overload. Buy this, eat this not that, look like this or you won't get laid, buy this new car because it's better for the planet, etc.

*Shrugs*
Not even the Soviet empire ruled for ever.

Fear-mongering.
 
Last edited:
I'm confused, you seem to romanticize the notion of megacorps greatly yet most dystopian settings (Dredd, Robocop, Bladerunner) tend to feature megacorps as this horribly bloated powerhouse that manipulates government organizations into establishing policies that benefit them.

Huxley's Brave New World warned of a society that would be the total opposite of Orwell's 1984. Megacorps would be closer to Huxley's hypothetical world - the people being drowned by sensory overload. Buy this, eat this not that, look like this or you won't get laid, buy this new car because it's better for the planet, etc.

Huxley won over Orwell as that's just 21st Century America, China, and other first world nations.

I write cyberpunk fiction (the books have just been delayed until this year) so I have both a fascination with the concept and have a somewhat ambivalent relationship with the tropes thereof. I think part of the issue is the fact the majority of cyberpunk writers are either from deeply urbanized areas like New York, Los Angeles, or London.

The thing is, I'm from Appalachia so I *KNOW* what it's like to be directly ruled by corporations who employ 90% of your city and own all much of the housing as well as public buildings. The big city-boys whine about advertising but don't really know what it's like to have everything under the control of business with the local politicians as nothing more than mouthpieces for one single company. They're usually mouthpieces for several and can get new ones if they want to change their mind or the party resists.

Go to the Kentucky Highlands Museum museum in our city and you'll be stunned that it has a children's playpen which is a re-creation of our city's factories and lots of videos made to explain how Ashland Oil, and Kentucky Power brought civilization to the rural hillbillies. They actually removed the exhibit dedicated to Ashland veterans during WW2 to talk about how the companies were founded. Honestly, they'd be incredibly racist if not for the fact the people they're talking about as savages are white.

I deeply deeply loathe these organizations but I also understand how they come to power and how the people pretty much are the ones who prop them up as alternatives to big government. The MobTM is prone to greed every bit as much as the individual and easily swayed by promises of prosperity.

American influence is dependent on these corporations nowaways and their bloated obsessive power which is near impossible to reign in and the atrocities they commit within the US, especially environmental damage (cancer, nerve-damage, and similar things are constants iin my area--not that anyone will ever bring the companies to task for it). Again, Enron's collapse affected not just people in Texas but people in my home town and that was a company run by lies and greed.

On the other hand, having seen behind the curtain, I also understand how much of the United States' security and cheap goods comes from using these companies to leverage the economies of other nations and keep them from hostility with America or allying with its enemies. One of the most amazing things I'd ever seen was attending a speech with my father how they talked about essentially remaking Northern India with a series of power plants all owned by local companies owned by American companies owned by KEP's parent companies.

The amazing part being it wasn't a proposal but following up on how it worked and how half the region was now employed by them. They'd also bought up all of the local real estate and were going to move large numbers of people into company housing dependent on them.

We are living in an age where the British East India Company has given birth to many many children.
 
Last edited:
Bernie may be shinier, but he is even more hollow than before.

Both parties, as with politics in general, will be influenced by many factors, money being one. This hasn't changed then and it will not change now. I hardly think that alone, makes the left more right. They still favor regulation more so than the GOP as well.

The left may be for drone operations but the overall global message is one of fair play and limiting our foreign policy. They still retain their deep fascination with drastic military cuts (albeit not in automation), like closing foreign bases.

Besides the blatant religious aspect and the Ayn Rand outlook on business (which I happen to disagree with), the GOP, sees the need for foreign policy and having an active part in shaping it. It has never been more true when one says that people like Trump and Bernie have essentially ruined both parties with populism and pandering to the LCD.
 
Last edited:
@DarkCorp
Coal is extremely bad for the environment and working to end coal dependency is a good start. Coal shouldn't be so subsidized.

Dollars are necessary to buy all those goods that Venezuela doesn't make. It is funny how money works after the gold standard.

Caution on taking coal power generation out to quickly.

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/01/1...icity-rates-failed-to-reduce-pollution-report

Its very easy to demonize something even if getting rid of it will have only a miniscule effect on the environment, but can drive power generation costs to go up a crazy amount. I do believe that we need to phase it out, but you have to way the risk/reward factor in what you want the outcome to be.
 
Caution on taking coal power generation out to quickly.

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/01/1...icity-rates-failed-to-reduce-pollution-report

Its very easy to demonize something even if getting rid of it will have only a miniscule effect on the environment, but can drive power generation costs to go up a crazy amount. I do believe that we need to phase it out, but you have to way the risk/reward factor in what you want the outcome to be.

Speaking, again, as the guy who lives in a region where coal is not only a lifestyle but the ONLY industry in many parts of the state and neighboring states:

* Coal is a finite resource
* No one really wants it versus energy in general
* The extraction process is horrifyingly devastating to the environment despite the cheap ass parks build over the ruins. Plenty of groundwater damage too.
* Coal doesn't make nearly as much money as it used to, not even exported to other countries which bought a couple of decades to the industry. Note: Humorously, the Kentucky tobacco industry is still going strong as it just started selling all its cigarettes in Asia than in America.
* Coal barons (which sounds so damned dated but I don't know what else to call them) still try to keep the companies from diversifying since their wealth is all tied up in owning coal equipment and land that can be used for decades.
* Coal plants in addition to being shitty for the environment, don't produce much energy

BE THAT AS IT MAY

* West Virginia's economy depends on coal the way Detroits' depended on automobiles. Kentucky and Tenn are moving away from coal better than WV but when coal DOES die, it will destroy the state. DESTROY.

Which can be averted but WV is doing its best not to modernize or diversify.
 
How many tanks can cross the atlantik, Mr. Fantastic.
Already there cupcake. You ever see how many bases the US has in Europe? entire continent practically belongs to America, but Americans are benevolent people and will continue to protect European interests and make sure Middle-Eastern oil flows to their homes so the Smug Europeans of the internet can have their cake and eat it too, less we have them do something terrible and actually do something.

Not that Europeans doing anything would be anything good since the last time Europe did something, 40+ million people died.

now say it, say thank you Mr.America. DO IT!
 
Already there cupcake. You ever see how many bases the US has in Europe? entire continent practically belongs to America, but Americans are benevolent people and will continue to protect European interests and make sure Middle-Eastern oil flows to their homes so the Smug Europeans of the internet can have their cake and eat it too, less we have them do something terrible and actually do something.

Not that Europeans doing anything would be anything good since the last time Europe did something, 40+ million people died.

now say it, say thank you Mr.America. DO IT!

Eh, the whole reason the European Union was created to give Europe back some economic muscle and growing pains.

Re: NATO and defense

The big issue boils down to the fact there's a serious question if nukes actually would ever be used in a conflict between, say, America and Russia. Russian doctrine was originally, 'hit them with everything we've got' but British and American doctrines included ideas of an escalation of war.

In which case, the entirety of nuclear weapons as a deterrent goes out the window.

But if they CAN be used, does America really need a big a presence there as it does (the answer is yes but only because it's a base to get into the Middle East)
 
reasonable argument
You cut that shit out right now. If you have been following topic you post either needs to reek of insufferable smugness or you got to be as Jingoistic as possible. Also say anybody who disagrees with you is a racist. but I digress.

As far as I am aware doctrine involved USUK forces holding a series of passes into Germany and if that failed we glass the entire region with tactical nukes. thus ending the Communist invasion of Europe.....for a couple weeks before Ivan marches what's left of his army through a radioactive cloud of death.

Also China might have made a land grab in Siberia, those two were always going at in secret commie on commie conflicts you never really heard about.
 
Last edited:
Speaking, again, as the guy who lives in a region where coal is not only a lifestyle but the ONLY industry in many parts of the state and neighboring states:

* Coal is a finite resource
* No one really wants it versus energy in general
* The extraction process is horrifyingly devastating to the environment despite the cheap ass parks build over the ruins. Plenty of groundwater damage too.
* Coal doesn't make nearly as much money as it used to, not even exported to other countries which bought a couple of decades to the industry. Note: Humorously, the Kentucky tobacco industry is still going strong as it just started selling all its cigarettes in Asia than in America.
* Coal barons (which sounds so damned dated but I don't know what else to call them) still try to keep the companies from diversifying since their wealth is all tied up in owning coal equipment and land that can be used for decades.
* Coal plants in addition to being shitty for the environment, don't produce much energy

BE THAT AS IT MAY

* West Virginia's economy depends on coal the way Detroits' depended on automobiles. Kentucky and Tenn are moving away from coal better than WV but when coal DOES die, it will destroy the state. DESTROY.

Which can be averted but WV is doing its best not to modernize or diversify.

Did you read the article in the link? I am not talking about the economics or environmental impact of mining said resource. But the economic impact on individual's when your power bills (referred to in Ontario as hydro due to the company generating power) becomes more than the mortgage on your house. This was a consequence of removing the coal generators and forcing the installation of entirely new infrastructure due to the impact that the generators had on the environment. Nowadays the Ontario Liberal party responsible for this travesty of short sightedness is most likely to be turfed next election and the affects on the environment have been miniscule. In the article it talks of how gravel roads, or cooking of meat outdoors has had just a big of an impact in the partical mass in the air as the coal plants did.

So in the end the removal of coal generators in an extremely short timeline will be extremely bad for both business's and individuals with barely and noticeable affect on the environment. Hence why I said caution of the removal too quickly.

Plus the blacksmiths out there would be mad if the could not get ahold of some coal.
 
Back
Top