The All things Political Topic - The Night never knew that its end was fleet.

[Gromnir]

3 hours ago, ComradeYellow said:

Joe Biden has ‘great confidence’ in top general Milley after Trump revelation | Joe Biden | The Guardian

A general with integrity, haven't heard stories like that since what?  The Civil War?

none since civil war? serious? am not surprised by your ignorance. immediate thought o' general william sharp who when he reluctant surrendered to the japenese, he refused to identify the identities o' his filipino soldiers to his captors. the general suffered torture until 1945 'cause o' his integrity and died short after final being rescued. hardly a solitary example from ww2. is also a fair number o' examples o' post civil war american generals and admirals who were punished for speaking truth to power, which isn't too surprising 'cause is a notoriously american thing to do.

doing the right thing is often the hard choice because it exposes the righteous man/woman to legit punishment.

have mentioned previous, but is a poor kept secret o' the criminal defense bar that a noteworthy % o' "anonymous tips" which lead to capture/prosecution o' criminals is lawyers calling the police to provide info regarding their clients or the associates o' said clients. ethics violation. if is info gained via privilege and is 'bout past crime, then is verboten for an attorney to divulge info. more rare than the anonymous call to authorities is the lawyer who public shares info with the Court or cops. 

so imagine a situation where 'cause o' police error, a criminal is about to have murder charges dropped. it happens. exclusionary rule here in the US is a bit o' an outlier as we not only punish cops for failure, but we allow the guilty to avoid justice when cops, prosecutors or judges make mistakes. so, knowing her client is about to be set free 'cause o' some kinda fruit of the poisonous tree fail, a lawyer tells the court 'bout the additional three adolescents his client killed and dumped in a new jersey landfill, victims which the cops is unaware. is arguable the lawyer in our example did the moral thing by communicating with the authorities. even so, the lawyer should lose her license to practice law. 

what milley did were unethical and consequences is appropriate. assuming the allegations regarding milley in the book is true, am reassured by the knowledge the general chose to protect the nation even if it meant sacrificing his career to do so, but such a recognition does not mean milley should go unpunished. 

september 28 testimony will be... interesting. 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

8 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

none since civil war? serious? am not surprised by your ignorance. immediate thought o' general william sharp who when he reluctant surrendered to the japenese, he refused to identify the identities o' his filipino soldiers to his captors. the general suffered torture until 1945 'cause o' his integrity and died short after final being rescued. hardly a solitary example from ww2. is also a fair number o' examples o' post civil war american generals and admirals who were punished for speaking truth to power, which isn't too surprising 'cause is a notoriously american thing to do.

doing the right thing is often the hard choice because it exposes the righteous man/woman to legit punishment.

have mentioned previous, but is a poor kept secret o' the criminal defense bar that a noteworthy % o' "anonymous tips" which lead to capture/prosecution o' criminals is lawyers calling the police to provide info regarding their clients or the associates o' said clients. ethics violation. if is info gained via privilege and is 'bout past crime, then is verboten for an attorney to divulge info. more rare than the anonymous call to authorities is the lawyer who public shares info with the Court or cops. 

so imagine a situation where 'cause o' police error, a criminal is about to have murder charges dropped. it happens. exclusionary rule here in the US is a bit o' an outlier as we not only punish cops for failure, but we allow the guilty to avoid justice when cops, prosecutors or judges make mistakes. so, knowing her client is about to be set free 'cause o' some kinda fruit of the poisonous tree fail, a lawyer tells the court 'bout the additional three adolescents his client killed and dumped in a new jersey landfill, victims which the cops is unaware. is arguable the lawyer in our example did the moral thing by communicating with the authorities. even so, the lawyer should lose her license to practice law. 

what milley did were unethical and consequences is appropriate. assuming the allegations regarding milley in the book is true, am reassured by the knowledge the general chose to protect the nation even if it meant sacrificing his career to do so, but such a recognition does not mean milley should go unpunished. 

september 28 testimony will be... interesting. 

HA! Good Fun!

This is one of those debatable points and is nuanced but Milleys concern that Trump could somehow order  some sort of nuclear action  shouldnt be ignored as was raised by Woodward

Considering the numerous " unconstitutional " things Trump did or wanted to do why do you think he should be punished now by the Biden presidency?

I do support the reason you have trenchant structures in the military and what generals can or cant do but dont you think this is the exception?

For example lets say in some nightmare scenario Trump wanted to nuke China at the end of his presidency .....dont you think this should have been ignored by the generals because of the global fallout and consequences ?

[ComradeYellow]

51 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

 am not surprised by your ignorance.

My ignorance?  You're the one who comes off sounding like some grey puffed up elitist know-it-all.

But I shall concede that I forgot General Smedley Butler who wrote "War is a Racket" which should be mandatory reading for all middle schoolers.

Milley did nothing wrong, and I'm not even sure I would have the courage to do what he did were I in his shoes, taking such big countermeasures against an unhinged maniac POTUS and his basically neo-Confederate constituency.

[Gromnir]

3 hours ago, ComradeYellow said:

My ignorance?  You're the one who comes off sounding like some grey puffed up elitist know-it-all.

 

you do realize Gromnir seeming to be a "know-it-all" does not in any way preclude the recognition o' your lack o' knowledge, yes? you spout off 'bout issues you obvious have extreme limited knowledge concerning and then make broad generalizations relying on what you so clear do not know or misrepresent. Gromnir's elitism is relevant to such a flaw in what way? 

don't blame us for your lack o' knowledge. instead, given your newfound awareness there is a possibility some know-it-all elitist is gonna challenge your absence o' facts or support when you make a generalization or posit a conclusion, maybe first do the work and educate self instead. this way, instead o' complaining when persons highlight your error or ignorance, you may instead have a knowledgeable response. 

again, notice you ain't defending the notion there has been an absence o' american generals o' integrity since civil war. your complaint is 'bout Gromnir. reflect for a moment and you are gonna see how such a response does not make you appear less ignorant. 

4 hours ago, BruceVC said:

For example lets say in some nightmare scenario Trump wanted to nuke China at the end of his presidency .....dont you think this should have been ignored by the generals because of the global fallout and consequences ?

you posit an extreme example, but once again am observing there is a difference 'tween rightness and requirements o' being a general in the US military. the decisions milley made is purposeful taken outta the hands o' the military leadership and given over to civilian authority. can't have generals ignoring civilian commanders, even if is the right thing to do.  again, is possible to be moral right and ethic wrong.  as such am seeing no conflict in the recognition that if allegations is true, it is appropriate to fire milley and even to kick him outta the military while at the same time observing milley deserves to be applauded for resisting tyranny.

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Edited September 16, 2021 by Gromnir

[Gorth]

China upset because neighbours wont just bend over and take it in the butt...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-58564837

The UK, US and Australia have announced a historic security pact in the Asia-Pacific, in what's seen as an effort to counter China.

It will let Australia build nuclear-powered submarines for the first time, using technology provided by the US.

The Aukus pact, which will also cover AI and other technologies, is one of the countries' biggest defence partnerships in decades, analysts say.

China has condemned the agreement as "extremely irresponsible".

Foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said it "seriously undermines regional peace and stability and intensifies the arms race".

 

Particularly hilarious sounding, coming from the country with the largest navy in the world at the moment.

 

"This is an historic opportunity for the three nations, with like-minded allies and partners, to protect shared values and promote security and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region," the joint statement read.

"This really shows that all three nations are drawing a line in the sand to start and counter [China's] aggressive moves in the Indo-Pacific," said Guy Boekenstein from the Asia Society Australia.

[Zoraptor]

I know most of the anglo press is doing VinceMcMahonMeetsStaceyKeibler.gif over the deal but really...

It's managed to annoy the french (and the EU) pretty badly and at least partly completely pointlessly. Which would usually be a bit of a bonus for me at least but in this case is counter productive at best if your goal is to contain China*. It's difficult not to have some sympathy for the french, as they seem to be expected to bend their arms deals to US sensibilities disproportionately- such as the cancellation of the Mistral sales to Russia- and the timing either showed ignorance or was deliberately obnoxious, made a few hours before the EU announced its Pacific policy. Along with the mess made in Afghanistan the Biden reset in relationships seems a lot more like a continuance of Trump's policy, just with more completely empty expressions of fraternité and kamaraderie tacked on for effect and a few less overt policy stupidities like trying to force Europe to buy US natural gas. It's also somewhat annoyed Canada and the fourth part of the quad, India, because the US doesn't want to share tech with them.

But most importantly, Aukus <<< ANZUS. ANZUS sounds cool, Aukus sounds like great value Tolkien.

*and is a great illustration of the fundamental problems with modern US foreign policy. Pointless and counterproductive stuff done so you can get more money for your arms industry. And in the end this is a miniscule step towards containment given that the three countries involved are all allies already. If they really want to contain China they have to tackle the elephant in the room which is rapprochement with Russia. There is no effective containment of China without Russia. Still, at least it's more effective than the old tactic previously used on Japan; trying to get China to appreciate its currency into a permanent recession which for some reason the Chinese declined to do.

[Malcador]

The French strike back!

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/09/16/us/political-news/expressing-fury-over-the-australia-submarine-deal-france-cancels-a-gala-celebrating-relations-with-the-us

But in all seriousness, seems like an unnecessary situation to generate.

[Raithe]

[Malcador]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-58604655.amp?s=09

Well US admits they screwed up and wasted 10 people for nothing.

[Malcador]

France recalling ambassadors from Australia and US now, hm.  Guess the Japanese might get a chuckle out of all this, they got sniped out their bid to equip Australia with subs by France - Australia's military procurement seems lousy in all of this.

[Zoraptor]

Australian military procurement is lousy-see the aforementioned Collins class subs for a pertinent example- but countries in general seem to tolerate an awful lot of stuff from military procurement that they'd never accept for civil matters.

And speaking of things that make countries highly popular: New Zealand cancels cricket tour of Pakistan half an hour before play starts in the first match. Not really much choice when the government spooks tell you to due to an imminent terrorist threat, but Pakistan is a country that loves cricket so much that their elected PM is also their best ever cricketer. We could hardly have made ourselves less popular if we'd turned up in 'I ♥ Modi' shirts and changed our National Anthem to 'Gods Defend Bharat'.

[Gorth]

3 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Australian military procurement is lousy-see the aforementioned Collins class subs for a pertinent example- but countries in general seem to tolerate an awful lot of stuff from military procurement that they'd never accept for civil matters.

Because I lived 5 years in Adelaide, I was quite used to see the ASC yards down at the harbour. But the Collins class procurement issues only ranks the 12th worst managed Australian defense procurement debacle.

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp0102/02RP03

Sadly, it doesn't list the 11 issues above it, but I'm sure the F-111 acquisition ranks up there...

 

[Zoraptor]

How do you get worse than a submarine that could (allegedly) be heard from the surface without using sonar? Did they buy F-111s airframes but not the engines.

(New Zealand's worst purchase is probably the HMNZS Charles Upham, which at least didn't cost us too much since it got sold back to civilian use after 5 years of doing nothing but refits. Mostly a bad purchase because the real Charles Upham was a monumental badass and the ship was never fit for purpose, and had very little purpose for us)

[Gorth]

2 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

How do you get worse than a submarine that could (allegedly) be heard from the surface without using sonar? Did they buy F-111s airframes but not the engines.

Better yet, they bought the planes before any parts existed (early 1960’s). The specs were probably state of the art in the 1960’s, but they didn’t start showing up until the late 70’s because of technical problems. They never got rid of that image. Planes crashing didn’t help the perception of being very expensive money pits. Not as bad as the Bundeswehr’s experiences with the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter mind  you. That one tried to kill as many German fighter pilots as the allies did in wwii (exaggerated a bit, it didn’t get close to numbers)

 

edit: The Collins class is what you get when you sack your German U-Boot partner to replace them with US partners

[rjshae]

20 hours ago, Malcador said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-58604655.amp?s=09

Well US admits they screwed up and wasted 10 people for nothing.

I have to suspect that, at the time, there was a lot of intense pressure on the military brass to stop another bombing, which led to hasty intel conclusions and targeting mistakes. All part of the fog of war.

My sympathies for the family targeted.

[BruceVC]

9 minutes ago, rjshae said:

I have to suspect that, at the time, there was a lot of intense pressure on the military brass to stop another bombing, which led to hasty intel conclusions and targeting mistakes. All part of the fog of war.

My sympathies for the family targeted.

I agree, it was a terrible tragedy. These things sadly occur in war zones and countries like Afghanistan 

[Hurlshort]

I show my students something called CNN10 at the start of class most days. It is a good snapshot of current events and usually doesn't get too serious. But today's episode showed this general responding to the mistaken bombing of an aid worker and a family in retaliation for the airport bombing. Needless to say, the students were not impressed by the General's explanation.

[BruceVC]

@Gorth

Gorthfuscious whats the general view from Oz citizens about the decision to buy the nuclear subs from the US and UK instead of France. Whats your media saying and do people support the government decision ?

Edited September 20, 2021 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

27 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

I show my students something called CNN10 at the start of class most days. It is a good snapshot of current events and usually doesn't get too serious. But today's episode showed this general responding to the mistaken bombing of an aid worker and a family in retaliation for the airport bombing. Needless to say, the students were not impressed by the General's explanation.

What do the students think about the 13 US soldiers and 130 Afghan civilians killed by ISIS at the airport that led to this tragedy. It must be tough covering this events in context  with young people ?

[Sarex]

5 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

What do the students think about the 13 US soldiers and 130 Afghan civilians killed by ISIS at the airport that led to this tragedy. It must be tough covering this events in context  with young people ?

How does that, in any way, excuse the killing of civilians...children no less...

[Hurlshort]

10 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

What do the students think about the 13 US soldiers and 130 Afghan civilians killed by ISIS at the airport that led to this tragedy. It must be tough covering this events in context  with young people ?

"Two wrongs don't make a right" was the actual quote from one student, and most seemed to agree with her.

[BruceVC]

49 minutes ago, Sarex said:

How does that, in any way, excuse the killing of civilians...children no less...

Who said the context was an excuse to the killing of the civilians? But I would have assumed the background to the tragedy and loss of US soldiers would have been part of the discussion because its not the like the US said " lets kill civilians and children " since it happened as a response 

[ComradeYellow]

U.S. has been blowing up civilian vehicles based on faulty intel "accidently" for decades now, this is really nothing new except MSM deciding to report this particular case for some reason.  I think it's because they're disgusted with Biden's withdrawal and kinda lost their hero complex in him so decided to get back at him, or something along those lines.

It's concerning because nations, like people, pay for their transgressions and I'm afraid all this is gonna back and haunt the U.S. sometime in the near future and my family and myself might be in physical danger. 

[Gfted1]

If its been going on for decades, whats triggered the hit squad for you this time?

[Zoraptor]

Eh, there are plenty of reasons for that. Not least that there's been a very well publicised apology this time which you don't usually get and which makes it very difficult to use the usual deflection strategies, though it didn't stop them trying.

The typical cycle is to claim it was absolutely a correct strike, followed a few days to a week later by saying it was a 100% correct strike but is now under investigation because the locals insist an innocent target was hit but everyone should be patient, maybe followed months later by some sort of admission that maybe it wasn't quite as correct as had been made out, buried as half an column inch on p57 of the NYT if carried at all. And in between the first and last step you have a horde of people saying how it had to be this or that because a ginsu was used so any explosion had to be secondary, then that prejudgements are being made and you need to be patient, and the like. Usually, the coverage just goes away and literally no consequences are faced, instead of literally no consequences apart from having to make an apology on camera that goes on CNN/ BBC et alia. When the subject of bad US drone strikes comes up this one will be the poster child for years to come, precisely because they had to very publicly admit this one at least was wrong- when many suspect that it's the tip of the iceberg.

They clearly knew they'd hit the wrong target pretty early*, but continued saying it was a righteous strike because they'd previously got away with obfuscating it until everyone forgot and hoped it would work this time. This time though the whole thing was tied into a very unpopular and chaotic withdrawal in which hitting an aid worker instead of an ISIS guy was... all too emblematic, and there was ample motivation to actually report on the matter instead of letting it go.

*there's some mitigation for the initial mistake because there actually was an attack involving a white Toyota (sedan) the same day and the aid worker did drive a white Toyota as well (albeit station wagon/ estate, not sedan). While it did not involve a suicide bomber but a makeshift rail of grads fired at the airport (missing by a couple of kilometres; who would have thought firing a notoriously inaccurate rocket from a sedan boot wouldn't work well? Not ISIS, apparently. Biggest achievement was setting the car on fire) it seems very likely that the basic intelligence was correct, but they misidentified the vehicle. Even if they lacked that newfangled tech known as 'the internet' (maybe they still called it darpanet and got confused?) where the correct id of the target was made within minutes multiple flags should have been raised when a similar vehicle did carry out an attack very soon after.