Jump to content

The all things Political topic -In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie


Amentep

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Gorth said:

Tibet and Vietnam might disagree with you on that one. Although they did later withdraw their troops from Vietnam

Edit: Thanks to stealing an arm and a leg when it comes to technology, the Chinese army of 2021 is not comparable to the miserable state it was in in during the 1950's, 60's and 70's

I think he means 'Chinese history as a whole' and yes he's pretty accurate here and paranoia about imminent invasion could be construed as projection because we all know the U.S. has never invaded any countries.

I mean the Chinese built a wall to keep the barbarians out, not to invade them. 

Will they actually invade Taiwan though considering their current government's policies and their significant wealth?  I dunno. Maybe?  But recent activities suggest maybe not because they've been using more subtle strategies and pressures to gain influence in other regions.

“If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other.” 

-Ulysses S. Grant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ComradeYellow said:

I think he means 'Chinese history as a whole' and yes he's pretty accurate here and paranoia about imminent invasion could be construed as projection because we all know the U.S. has never invaded any countries.

I mean the Chinese built a wall to keep the barbarians out, not to invade them. 

Will they actually invade Taiwan though considering their current government's policies and their significant wealth?  I dunno. Maybe?  But recent activities suggest maybe not because they've been using more subtle strategies and pressures to gain influence in other regions.

Like the military coup in Myanmar that just coincided with demonstrators making life difficult for Chinese companies in Myanmar?

 

  • Gasp! 1

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone following the trial of D.C.?

I wonder how fair it is going to be, especially when the "public" and large portion of media made their verdict already. 

I recently came across by accident on this page, as i looked into behavioral aspects for jury/judge of how the recent riots could potentially influence the ruling. 

 

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/04/derek-chauvin-trial-prosecution-problems-ignored-or-misrepresented-in-mainstream-media-open-thread/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was in the WSJ the other day. I just saw it this morning. Sharing here because we were just talking about it 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-real-lessons-of-the-cuban-missile-crisis-11617985606

"What can't be changed must be endured"

Robert Jordan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Gromnir said:

am gonna assume you is joking, 'cause lord knows clausewitz would roll over in his grave to hear gd opine 'bout US troop withdrawals overseas. sacrifice one o' the most obvious and effective methods for the nation state to impose its will (at least from Clausewitz pov) while simultaneous advocating a poison pill approach made all the more ridiculous by your stated lack o' trust o' any and all persons who might be responsible for making decisions regarding a nuclear arsenal.

must be joking, 'cause is no way gd gets to invoke clausewitz serious.

HA! Good Fun!

 

You know it IS perfectly ok to accept some things famous thinkers have said without buying into the whole of their philosophy. I thought Rand made some good points in Atlas Shrugged, that does not mean I am objectivist. I can think Marx made some good points without being communist. Philosophical absolutism is not one of my vices

"What can't be changed must be endured"

Robert Jordan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ComradeYellow said:

I think he means 'Chinese history as a whole' and yes he's pretty accurate here and paranoia about imminent invasion could be construed as projection because we all know the U.S. has never invaded any countries.

Strange to dismiss recent examples (also forgot to mention Kashmir)

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Guard Dog said:

You know it IS perfectly ok to accept some things famous thinkers have said without buying into the whole of their philosophy. 

you gut his philosophy.  am not overstating.

when trump seemed to misunderstand the stoopid of abandoning conventional forces and traditional troops in favor o' nukes approach, a few o' the generals were no doubt horrified but they gave the President the same clausewitz-based explanation the 50s and 60s politicians needed regarding the mind numbing stoopid o' depending on nukes as a functional replacement for traditional means o' imposing nation-state will.   

nukes is less 'bout imposing will. reliance on massive nuclear deterrence functional emasculates the capacity to impose will on adversaries. by surrendering a nation's capacity to exercise its will across the globe in favor o' a defensive posture which would only ever be utilized in extreme examples, the ability to realize clausewitz visions becomes impossible. nuclear deterrence is a crude response to the actions of other nation states and recycling  abandoned 1950s era policy and/or trumpian ignorance is no excuse for trying to rewrite clausewitz to suit your purposes.

(complete aside: a fundamental flaw o' clausewitz is he did not envision asymmetrical conflicts 'tween nation states and non-state actors. )

nukes is a profound blunt instrument. worse, the military folks who oversee the arsenals but do not control nuclear policy and preparedness has explained, many times, that the most likely nuclear war scenario is accidental. so many near misses. that reality should horrify everybody, but especial somebody who voices contempt and distrust for politicians like some kinda religious mantra.  as such is once again impossible for us to square different aspects o' what you claim to ardent believe. 

regardless, am thinking Gromnir and not gd is the one who may legitimate ask the following question: "Have you ever read Von Clausewitz?"

HA! Good Fun!

 

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hurlsnot said:

China isn't going to invade Taiwan anytime soon. They don't have a track record of doing things like that. They will find another way to take it if they want it.

fixed.

china has a few looming potential catastrophes to address which is undersold here in the west. IF situation gets bad enough in china (and "bad enough" is soonest gonna be years from today) would the chinese invade taiwan as a way to distract the populace from the failures o' the ccp? is a bit too what if for us to serious consider today. however, am not dismissing the possibility.

if china were to invade today (not today. would take many months to prepare a massive amphibious assault and is unlikely the west would be caught unawares.) pretty much every model projects a successful chinese invasion o' taiwan, with a few serious caveats.  'ccording to rand and others, the chinese could delay the US from achieving air superiority, which is hardly ideal for china. furthermore, taiwan has a robust typhoon season which lasts better than three months (july-september) so figure at least a few additional weeks pre typhoon season is also gonna be deemed verboten for an amphibious landing making 1/3 of the year impractical for an invasion. a successful invasion o' taiwan is start o' problems for china as they need then deal with a hostile population o' 23 million who enjoy a per capita gdp better than 3x that o' mainland chinese and is unlikely to see the invaders as liberators. invasion sees a substantial % o' chinese vessels sunk before ever getting to taiwan shores. from a couple years ago rand had estimates that subs alone could dispatch 41% o' a potential 2017 chinese invasion fleet making the invasion alone brobdinagian costly. etc.

a chinese blockade o' taiwan might be an alternative to invasion. am honest not having seen much serious discussion o' who does what in the event o' a blockade. the thing is, am admitted not certain what exact a blockade achieves. 

possible explanation: if you make everybody believe you is gonna invade taiwan, then perhaps china can use the threat as leverage to get away with doing something heretofore untenable in hong kong?

apologies  for double.

HA! Good Fun!

 

Edited by Gromnir

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

nothing new. as has already been noted, china takes taiwan if it is willing to invest the resources. am repeating self, but... headline clickbait aside, those rand studies mentioned in the article show that china never achieves air superiority and a significant % o' chinese vessels is sunk before ever reaching taiwan.  following a near certain successful invasion o' taiwan, china has gotta deal with a hostile population o' 23 million. post ww2, the US has been almost universal unwilling to make the necessary human and monetary investment to achieve successful regime change. is doubtful china makes similar mistakes in taiwan, but am thinking is too easy to forget how expensive it is to bring 'bout successful regime change. 

is tough to envision a scenario where china comes out looking like a winner following an invasion o' taiwan, even if they is most assured gonna be victorious in their efforts to invade.

HA! Good Fun!

Edited by Gromnir
  • Like 1

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Losing wargames is a good way to get an increase in your budget.

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

Anyone following the trial of D.C.?

I wonder how fair it is going to be, especially when the "public" and large portion of media made their verdict already. 

 

Yeah, the public and the media are going to make it hard for him to get away with it. The 9-minute video of him slowly killing the guy doesn't help, either. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I'm quite certain, that vast majority of people, who are warmongering on one or the other side, have no idea how hard their own lifes would be affected, no matter who would eventually win, if the conflict would remain in the convnetional weapons realm (in nuclear, the humanity lost in all scenarios). 

The amount of disruptions to trade and supply chains, people and property lost, geopol opportunism popping up, to stick it to one side or the other (and guess what country is the most hated one), in fact I'm certain that with the given trends, in a decade US will not have enough social cohesion and enough people feeling American in the way of being willing to die for their country and being proud of their country, that China is waiting to weather this storm, while slowly progressing with investments to have pan-asian land locked trade, and some infrustructure connecting directly to Africa as well. 

What can US and Western countries do, if you will have an effective trade union from China and Russia, through some old soviet republics, include Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran nd reach to Syria?  What will happen, if that will also get connected to Africa through pipelines? 

China's demise is that they are pushing unnecessarily Phillipines and India. But those two, with their current govs are hardly reliable partbers for US, Australia and other "western" countries. 

EU has no teeth, and even Turkey is making it look foolish and weak, by Edrogan humiliating EU delegation(where he did not prepare a room for a german woman, leader of eu parliment) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

Yeah, the public and the media are going to make it hard for him to get away with it. The 9-minute video of him slowly killing the guy doesn't help, either. 

 

See, even you are jumping to conclusion, that he 'killed' him. 

What if he killed himself with drug overdos, while the officer did not assist and failed to recognize that the dude is in agony? What if there was no intent to harm the guy? (police officer could have used more excessive force, including taser, but he chose not to?) 

 

Did you also jump to a conclusion, that a covington kid was a racist bastard abusing a native american veteran? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cop in Brookyln Center's been charged with second degree manslaughter. Seems about right, although I'm sure that want her to be charged with murder and then will be shocked when that fails.

https://kstp.com/news/former-brooklyn-center-police-officer-potter-to-be-charged-with-second-degree-manslaughter-in-daunte-wright-shooting-death/6074947/?cat=1

 

 

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Losing wargames is a good way to get an increase in your budget.

some truth to that. russian and chinese abilities is likely to be overstated to an overcautious degree, but would prefer over estimate than underestimate.

however, am wondering if you have heard of general paul van riper? do self a favor and do a search for paul van riper + war games.  the millennium challenge (2002) were a functional US loss, and the pentagon brass were not happy.

HA! Good Fun!

ps: (edit) misspelled "paul van riper" once in the post. got it right the second time, but flubbed the first. doubt it woulda' serious borked a search, but jic...

 

 

Edited by Gromnir

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

See, even you are jumping to conclusion, that he 'killed' him

And you're totally not, just in the other direction, right ?

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Malcador said:

And you're totally not, just in the other direction, right ?

I'm looking at the presented evidence and opinions so far. 

I'd say personally, there was definately no intent to murder, and possibly even no intent to do harm, there was however negligence in aspect of checking health state of the apperhanded suspect, and also resulting from that too much time spent on restraining the captive leading to delayed help, which arrived after the suspect was dead. 

I'd not call it murder in any case, and not sure if it would classify as manslaughter, but I'm no lawyer. There was a role in the death, but I would not attach to it any ill intent towards the captured person, who was aggresive towards other officers prior to arrival of the given officer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

some truth to that. russian and chinese abilities is likely to be overstated to an overcautious degree, but would prefer over estimate than underestimate.

however, am wondering if you have heard of general paul van ripper? do self a favor and do a search for paul van riper + war games.  the millennium challenge (2002) were a functional US loss, and the pentagon brass were not happy.

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Yeah I remember that, was a big to do just before Iraq.  Will have to brush up on it, but recall some issues with that simulation althought not quite "cheating" like I know some have said the OPFOR was doing

3 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

I'd not call it murder in any case, and not sure if it would classify as manslaughter, but I'm no lawyer. There was a role in the death, but I would not attach to it any ill intent towards the captured person, who was aggresive towards other officers prior to arrival of the given officer. 

I guess if there was ill intent, that would count as murder.  But why does his being aggressive towards Chauvin or the other officers matter at the point he's handcuffed, exactly ? 

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Malcador said:

 

I guess if there was ill intent, that would count as murder.  But why does his being aggressive towards Chauvin or the other officers matter at the point he's handcuffed, exactly ? 

You still can be dangerous? If a person is high on drugs, and there was sufficient behavioral aspects to imply that, that person can still be dangerous to others around and most importantly to oneself. I can imagine a situation, where you want to keep a person restrained until that person has fully calmed down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

I'm looking at the presented evidence and opinions so far. 

I'd say personally, there was definately no intent to murder, and possibly even no intent to do harm, there was however negligence in aspect of checking health state of the apperhanded suspect, and also resulting from that too much time spent on restraining the captive leading to delayed help, which arrived after the suspect was dead. 

I'd not call it murder in any case, and not sure if it would classify as manslaughter, but I'm no lawyer. There was a role in the death, but I would not attach to it any ill intent towards the captured person, who was aggresive towards other officers prior to arrival of the given officer. 

is worth dp checking what entails 3rd degree murder in minnesota. even if you do not believe chauvin deserves second degree murder, you are doing a fair job o' describing 3rd degree murder requirements in mn. chauvin is being charged with, among other things, 3rd degree murder, which may be punished by up to 25 years. 

manslaughter is punishable by max ten in mn? didn't bother to double-check.

HA! Good Fun!

ps am knowing this will confuse, but chauvin defense were trying to dismiss the 3rd degree charge and not second. second degree is the negligence murder charge and for practical reasons would result in less jail time than succesful prosecution o' 3rd degree.

1st degree is probable what dp is actual thinking o' when he is arguing no murder, 'cause that is the, "causes the death of a human being with premeditation and with intent to effect the death of the person or of another," crime.

Edited by Gromnir
  • Thanks 1

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admit, I do not necessarily understand all the nuances of what's what degree of 'murder' and what's manslaughter and what are the exact differences. 

I guess in my understanding 'murder' would require some sort of action in which the suspect has ability to understand that the given action can result in death, and the suspect decides on continuing that action. 

Manslaughter is an odd term to me in general 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

I'm looking at the presented evidence and opinions so far. 

I'd say personally, there was definately no intent to murder, and possibly even no intent to do harm, there was however negligence in aspect of checking health state of the apperhanded suspect, and also resulting from that too much time spent on restraining the captive leading to delayed help, which arrived after the suspect was dead. 

I'd not call it murder in any case, and not sure if it would classify as manslaughter, but I'm no lawyer. There was a role in the death, but I would not attach to it any ill intent towards the captured person, who was aggresive towards other officers prior to arrival of the given officer. 

The charge is 2nd degree unintentional murder, so there's no need to prove intent to murder. At a minimum it is involuntary manslaughter, but that charge may not apply for a police officer. The challenge for the jury will be determining whether there was intent to do harm. To me it doesn't look good.

"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, rjshae said:

The charge is 2nd degree unintentional murder, so there's no need to prove intent to murder. At a minimum it is involuntary manslaughter, but that charge may not apply for a police officer. The challenge for the jury will be determining whether there was intent to do harm. To me it doesn't look good.

Can this be proven beyond any doubt that there was an intent to do harm? Seems he chose less excessive form of apperhantion, and it did not look from a vid, like he was intending to do harm. There was no excessive force used, no repeated voilent physical actions, and not even verbal ones? There was a prolonged restraint, but there was no pressure to neck and the technique was apporved at that given time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Darkpriest said:

You still can be dangerous? If a person is high on drugs, and there was sufficient behavioral aspects to imply that, that person can still be dangerous to others around and most importantly to oneself. I can imagine a situation, where you want to keep a person restrained until that person has fully calmed down.

Seemed fairly calm, with his hands cuffed and considering the force of the police present, I'm skeptical of the peril Chauvin was in.

 

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Gorth locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...