Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats

It's long degraded into a disgusting pile of corrupt politics. As an effort to inspire international community through sport, it's already dead - we just keep putting the corpse on tour.
Don't forget spending millions of taxpayer dollars on facilities, usually go into debt, and then give all the profits from the events to a corporation (the IOC).

What, you thought the IOC was a charity or something that worked for the betterment of sports, the athletes, or something? HAHAHHAHA!!! They are an extremely low-overhead corporation that "grants" the rights to the Olympics to one place at a time, and sues the pants off of anybody else daring to use the word "Olympic" if they don't give them tons of money first.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
How the US Government tried to censor one of the biggest stories of the 20th century: the surrender of Germany.

TLDR version:
Who? The "Supreme Allied Command," though Eisenhower reportedly didn't like it. Politics.
How? Through the same club they wield today - access. If you want to keep your "access," you play ball.
Why? To give the soviets time to concoct a scenario which they could use as propaganda to show a great soviet victory to their huddled, starved, million-fewer-than-before masses.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
8 year old in Yemen dies of traumatic sexual injuries on her wedding night, inflicted by the 40 year old husband.

Article

FTA: In 2009, a law was created in Yemen that set the minimum age for marriage at 17. Unfortunately, it was repealed after more conservative lawmakers called it un-Islamic.

Feel free to bring this up next time someone talks about respecting other cultures.
 
8 year old in Yemen dies of traumatic sexual injuries on her wedding night, inflicted by the 40 year old husband.

Article

FTA: In 2009, a law was created in Yemen that set the minimum age for marriage at 17. Unfortunately, it was repealed after more conservative lawmakers called it un-Islamic.

Feel free to bring this up next time someone talks about respecting other cultures.
Published September 9th, 2013. News? Still horrible, bu I knew I heard about it before. Whole stink about it 'round here, too, what wit the discussion of recognising other countries' marriages and all that - we demand other countries accept our (for example, gay) marriage as legal, so we're supposed to honor marriages that wouldn't be legal here (for example, bigamist) as well. Except, of course, Islamic countries, whosem arriages we still accept, but who aren't bound to accept (gay, specifically) marriages if they're against their constitution. Of course, child abuse is against our laws, so... Do we accept this sort of marriage or not?

In case you were wondering, the party who said we shouldn't honor these marriages and deter the man involved and put the girl in custody (supposing they came over here) were tarred as racist oppressive imperialist scum while the socialist (freedom for all! Protect the weak and innocent! Down with religion, the opium of the masses! But always love and honor Islam because we need their votes they're oppressed!) and liberal parties fell over themselves to praise their own enlightened views on different cultures and how we should "support reform from within without enforcing our values". Oh how I love my country sometimes -_-
 

GasBandit

Staff member
As if the Obama administration's national security credibility wasn't shredded enough, they've just released 5 high ranking taliban from gitmo in exchange for a US soldier who was captured in 2009. Much has been made in the past about the question of if those released from guantanamo end up returning to the fight... and here are 5 that definitely will. How many soldiers put their lives on the line capturing these guys? And how many will be threatened again because of their release? And now that our enemies have a precedent, are more americans (especially civilian contractors and whatnot) in danger of abduction in order to be traded for more jihadist prisoners? The door is open - we have openly negotiated with terrorists. Furthermore, federal law requires the defense department to notify the appropriate congressional committees 30 days before making any prisoner transfers, but the administration didn't see fit to inform anyone until the day of the swap. Further demonstration that Obama and his coterie are complete scofflaws with no regard for either the rule of law or the separation of powers mandated by the constitution.

"With regard to the transfer of Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay, we have made -- the United States has not made the decision to do that, though we do expect the Taliban to raise this issue in our discussion, if and when those discussions happen. As we have long said, however, we would not make any decisions about transfer of any detainees without consulting with Congress and without doing so in accordance with U.S. law." -- White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, June 2013

Throw another scandal on the pile, I suppose. The IRS targeting, the NSA's mass data collection on american citizens, Benghazi, spying on AP reporters (and the associated perjury from Attorney General Eric Holder), Fast and Furious (and again, the associated perjury of Holder), Obamacare (website, exchanges, "if you like your doctor/plan, you can keep it," funding shell game, nonexistant promised reduction in premiums), the VA hospital scandal, Solyndra, the Justice Dept refusing to act on voter intimidation because it was the Black Panthers carrying it out, going to war in Libya without congressional approval, the selective enforcement of federal law, the overreaching "executive orders," drone targeting of US Citizens, nearly bungled us into the Syrian civil war - luckily we only had to lose international political face by having Putin of all people throw us a diplomatic lifeline... ok, now I've lost count. Jeez, that's a big pile.
 
As if the Obama administration's national security credibility wasn't shredded enough, they've just released 5 high ranking taliban from gitmo in exchange for a US soldier who was captured in 2009. Much has been made in the past about the question of if those released from guantanamo end up returning to the fight... and here are 5 that definitely will. How many soldiers put their lives on the line capturing these guys? And how many will be threatened again because of their release? And now that our enemies have a precedent, are more americans (especially civilian contractors and whatnot) in danger of abduction in order to be traded for more jihadist prisoners? The door is open - we have openly negotiated with terrorists. Furthermore, federal law requires the defense department to notify the appropriate congressional committees 30 days before making any prisoner transfers, but the administration didn't see fit to inform anyone until the day of the swap. Further demonstration that Obama and his coterie are complete scofflaws with no regard for either the rule of law or the separation of powers mandated by the constitution.

"With regard to the transfer of Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay, we have made -- the United States has not made the decision to do that, though we do expect the Taliban to raise this issue in our discussion, if and when those discussions happen. As we have long said, however, we would not make any decisions about transfer of any detainees without consulting with Congress and without doing so in accordance with U.S. law." -- White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, June 2013

Throw another scandal on the pile, I suppose. The IRS targeting, the NSA's mass data collection on american citizens, Benghazi, spying on AP reporters (and the associated perjury from Attorney General Eric Holder), Fast and Furious (and again, the associated perjury of Holder), Obamacare (website, exchanges, "if you like your doctor/plan, you can keep it," funding shell game, nonexistant promised reduction in premiums), the VA hospital scandal, Solyndra, the Justice Dept refusing to act on voter intimidation because it was the Black Panthers carrying it out, going to war in Libya without congressional approval, the selective enforcement of federal law, the overreaching "executive orders," drone targeting of US Citizens, nearly bungled us into the Syrian civil war - luckily we only had to lose international political face by having Putin of all people throw us a diplomatic lifeline... ok, now I've lost count. Jeez, that's a big pile.
My thoughts?

- The Taliban is not a terrorist organization in the same way as al Qaeda. It had operated openly as the government of Afghanistan for YEARS and had been recognized as such by at least 3 foreign states. It is only since it has been deposed that it's suddenly a terrorist organization. I don't buy that... it's certainly using terrorist tactics, but it's end goal is to restore it's governmental authority (that was taken from it by a hostile foreign power). It's fundamentally a politically movement... but one that is using illegal, gruesome tactics to achieve it's ends (because it's the only means left available to it).

- Working from that frame work, we did not negotiate with terrorists. We negotiated with an opposing force in a war.

- Terrorists have been kidnapping and ransoming American soldiers and civilians for decades before this happened. It's basically the same as the gun arguement: not negotiating didn't prevent them from trying to extort us, even back when we made it clear we didn't negotiate. The only reason they didn't do it more often is because Americans have been staying the fuck away from that area of the world for close to 13 years.

- If a contractor gets kidnapped, it's the duty of their employer to negotiate, not the US government. They'll usually pay too because they know if they don't then contractors will go to their competitors.

- What a shit deal. We traded 5 big wigs for a nobody? We should have given them one, tops. I know we're kind of tripping over them in Gitmo, but fuck... now everyone is going to think they can get that kind of deal.
 
Look, I'm glad the guy is free, he's actually one of my friends childhood friend, but the circumstances do seem… a little… shady?
 
Can you explain how "a politically movement...that is using illegal, gruesome tactics to achieve it's ends" is not a "terrorist organization"?
Is North Korea a terrorist organization or is it just a country led by a fascist government? It does much of the same things against it's own people... things the Taliban did during it's own reign as well. Really, it's not even a change of tactics. Remember that the Taliban is a displaced government. It RAN AN ENTIRE COUNTRY.[DOUBLEPOST=1401802758,1401802624][/DOUBLEPOST]
Look, I'm glad the guy is free, he's actually one of my friends childhood friend, but the circumstances do seem… a little… shady?
There are definitely shady elements to this. It should have gone before Congress and I'm disliking the the increased autonomy of the Executive branch just as much as I hate the complete breakdown of our Legislative branch.
 
Throw another scandal on the pile, I suppose. The IRS targeting, the NSA's mass data collection on american citizens, Benghazi, spying on AP reporters (and the associated perjury from Attorney General Eric Holder), Fast and Furious (and again, the associated perjury of Holder), Obamacare (website, exchanges, "if you like your doctor/plan, you can keep it," funding shell game, nonexistant promised reduction in premiums), the VA hospital scandal, Solyndra, the Justice Dept refusing to act on voter intimidation because it was the Black Panthers carrying it out, going to war in Libya without congressional approval, the selective enforcement of federal law, the overreaching "executive orders," drone targeting of US Citizens, nearly bungled us into the Syrian civil war - luckily we only had to lose international political face by having Putin of all people throw us a diplomatic lifeline... ok, now I've lost count. Jeez, that's a big pile.
You forgot his appointing of Czars (really bad choice of name) to try and bypass Congress's right to "vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper"
 
Throw another scandal on the pile, I suppose. The IRS targeting, the NSA's mass data collection on american citizens, Benghazi, spying on AP reporters (and the associated perjury from Attorney General Eric Holder), Fast and Furious (and again, the associated perjury of Holder), Obamacare (website, exchanges, "if you like your doctor/plan, you can keep it," funding shell game, nonexistant promised reduction in premiums), the VA hospital scandal, Solyndra, the Justice Dept refusing to act on voter intimidation because it was the Black Panthers carrying it out, going to war in Libya without congressional approval, the selective enforcement of federal law, the overreaching "executive orders," drone targeting of US Citizens, nearly bungled us into the Syrian civil war - luckily we only had to lose international political face by having Putin of all people throw us a diplomatic lifeline... ok, now I've lost count. Jeez, that's a big pile.
Here's another, though I don't think any media's going to talk about it. It's a bigger deal than they're making it out to be.

Reform immigration? Good fucking luck. And all five servers conveniently melted down at the same time ... that's totally coincidence, really.
 
The "problem" with that definition being, by it, such things as the French Resistance, the Founding Fathers, he Nazi soldiers,... have all been terrorists. Oh, and the US has even installed terrorists (not that that's really in any doubt). So the whole "we don't negotiate with terrorists" is a bit silly. Heck, practically any army has used terror as a weapon - bullying the population into submission is terrorizing them.

I don't necessarily disagree with the definition (though it's honestly quite loosely worded), but it does mean you've negotiated with terrorists plenty of times before.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
The "problem" with that definition being, by it, such things as the French Resistance, the Founding Fathers, he Nazi soldiers,... have all been terrorists. Oh, and the US has even installed terrorists (not that that's really in any doubt). So the whole "we don't negotiate with terrorists" is a bit silly. Heck, practically any army has used terror as a weapon - bullying the population into submission is terrorizing them.

I don't necessarily disagree with the definition (though it's honestly quite loosely worded), but it does mean you've negotiated with terrorists plenty of times before.
The meaning of the phrase "we don't negotiate with terrorists" is not a statement of purity, it refers to the legitimization and encouragement of terrorism as a means of achieving goals against you. If someone takes a hostage, and you give them the ransom they demand and let them go, it shows other would-be hostage takers that it is a productive enterprise to do so. On the other hand, if you instead do as, say, Israel commonly does, and write hostages off as already dead, storm the hostage takers, kill them all, and consider any hostages who survive to be a happy bonus, would-be hostage takers decide that taking hostages is not a productive use of their time, treasure, and lifeblood.

But once you open that door, it doesn't shut again without a lot of innocent blood and hard decisions. A whole lot. So much so that it's doubtful the will shall exist to get it shut again.
 
The meaning of the phrase "we don't negotiate with terrorists" is not a statement of purity, it refers to the legitimization and encouragement of terrorism as a means of achieving goals against you. If someone takes a hostage, and you give them the ransom they demand and let them go, it shows other would-be hostage takers that it is a productive enterprise to do so. On the other hand, if you instead do as, say, Israel commonly does, and write hostages off as already dead, storm the hostage takers, kill them all, and consider any hostages who survive to be a happy bonus, would-be hostage takers decide that taking hostages is not a productive use of their time, treasure, and lifeblood.

But once you open that door, it doesn't shut again without a lot of innocent blood and hard decisions. A whole lot. So much so that it's doubtful the will shall exist to get it shut again.
taken.jpg


Good luck.
 
GasBandit said:
I think you meant this for the other thread.
The kicker is I was pretty sure I was in the other thread, and don't even remember looking at this one today. More signs of getting old.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Word is getting out that the squadmates of the soldier Obama just traded 5 taliban lieutenants for are all saying he left a note when he walked off the base that he intended to defect to the Taliban. Just keeps getting better and better. The state department is spinning like a 45 LP.
 
Thank God I don't live in the Sout-

Wait, whats that video title?

Oh...

That store is 15 minutes away from my house.

*Incidentally, the suburb of Cheektowaga has the nickname of Cheektovegas due to the large amount of strip clubs in the area, so her claiming to be a strip for the cops isn't surprising in the slightest.
 
Thank God I don't live in the Sout-

Wait, whats that video title?

Oh...

That store is 15 minutes away from my house.

*Incidentally, the suburb of Cheektowaga has the nickname of Cheektovegas due to the large amount of strip clubs in the area, so her claiming to be a strip for the cops isn't surprising in the slightest.
I had to check a map, but with the place being that far upstate, I'm not surprised.

I laughed when she had to keep repeating things to the phone; either she wasn't actually talking to anyone, or the person on the other line didn't understand why she was acting like this.
 
UPSTATE FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.
*cough*
(It's Western NY damnit not Upstate /rage)
Wherever you come from in NY, anything north of that is upstate :p. So for me, it's upstate. However, my friends in Queens and Long Island consider my hometown to be upstate. It's a vicious chain.
 
Top