Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats
- Thread starter GasBandit
- Start date
Which is why Saudi Arabia is selling so much oil, so quickly... the Royal Family is ether looking to get weapons to protect themselves in the coming conflict or looking to move that cash off-shore and disappear before the coming revolution. Ether way, it's unlikely Saudi Arabia is going to be friendly to the US for much longer.
KKK Protest in Anaheim does not goes as planned as Counter-Protest proceeds to kick the shit out of them.
Bunch of people got stabbed before the cops showed up to take the KKK guys in.
Bunch of people got stabbed before the cops showed up to take the KKK guys in.
Necronic
Staff member
The biggest point of interest with the Iranian thing is that apparently there is another group called the hoise of experts or something which also went heavily reform, and they're the ones that will select the next ayatollah.
Look at that, diplomacy worked. Thank god the republicans didn't get their way on Iran.
Look at that, diplomacy worked. Thank god the republicans didn't get their way on Iran.
GasBandit
Staff member
Calling it a coincidence is a bit much... this was an easily foreseeable result of a repressive regime that could offer no viable solutions to the economic problems it was causing through it's own ceaseless hostility. Diplomacy clearly helped it along by ensuring that the reformists knew we would be friendlier to an Iran that wasn't interested in pursuing nuclear weapons, but ultimately it was the sanctions we put in place that isolated Iran for decades and Israel's proactive military actions that have made this kind of revolution possible. The Nuclear Deal was just the final push that made it clear we would honor our promises to a less hostile government, which is why the people of Iran are throwing out their strongmen... after all, what did they ever get them?
Really, this is a textbook case of economic sanctions can work in the long run, especially if you compare it to why it DIDN'T work on Cuba. This was the sort of change that took decades to accomplish.
Really, this is a textbook case of economic sanctions can work in the long run, especially if you compare it to why it DIDN'T work on Cuba. This was the sort of change that took decades to accomplish.
GasBandit
Staff member
I'm pretty sure this would have happened at some point even if the nuclear "deal" hadn't been made - there's been a whole lot of unrest in Iran in recent years, including some events that almost could have boiled over into open revolt if they'd had outside backing. This sort of sweeping political change doesn't happen overnight, or even over a few months. So crediting the nuclear deal with the reform party taking power is kinda putting the cart before the horse.
Actually, you're kind of just restating my point (if I somehow didn't make it clear). Basically, the Nuclear Deal was a gamble that has (seemingly) paid off and helped get things done sooner, but this was the work of decades of economic sanctions and would have likely had happened eventually on it's own. There is a ton of credit to spread around for this, over multiple administrations, going all the way back to Carter.
That said, nothing's certain until we know for sure that Iran has abandoned it's weapon's program. That's something we won't know for sure for years. Still, we at least have some hope that things will resolve peacefully in Iran at some point.
GasBandit
Staff member
Who in particular made the argument to invade Iran? I remember talks about airstrikes on nuclear sites, but is there actually a republican who argued for a 2016 invasion of Iran?
Not an invasion and not 2016, but the attitude hasn't changed since this oldie but goodie...
GasBandit
Staff member
Like I said... air strikes. There's a big difference between air strikes an an invasion, and Necronic specifically said invasion.
We're currently using air strikes in Syria. We're not invading.
Dave
Staff member
Why did they take the KKK guys in? They look like they were the victims here. I disagree with everything they stand for but they have the right to be there if they are peaceful. All I've seen from this is others assaulting them.
I think it's one of two things:
- The KKK guys were the ones who pulled knives and stabbed people (as evident by the guy not in uniform on the ground bleeding). That's assault with a deadly weapon until you can prove in a court it was self defense.
- Wasn't someone shouting GUN in the video? One of them might have been packing without a permit.
GasBandit
Staff member
They didn't just arrest the KKK members, they arrested some on both sides (six KKK, seven protesters). The klansmen were using stabbing weapons, they claim to "defend themselves." All the stabbing victims were protestors.
Source: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/...-violence-one-man-stabbed-20160227-story.html
In order to have a sufficient claim for self defense, you must show that...
- You didn't start the fight or argument.
- You didn't accept a challenge.
- You attempted to walk/run away from the challenge.
- You must prove you couldn't walk away after trying to.
- You must prove your life was in danger or you were in danger of serious harm.
About the only thing the video proves is the last one, as the counter protesters DID attack them. It should also be noted that California does not have a Stand Your Ground law, meaning that the KKK protesters were obligated to try to run when confronted with actual violence... some of them did, as we see the truck with the signs driving off at one point. The others didn't and instead drew weapons to try and kill their attackers. Using the knives in this fashion is an Illegal Weapons charge, which means the cops HAD to bring them in no matter what.
Like it or not, those KKK guys who pulled knives WILL do time. Their known association with a hate group is all the rope a jury needs to hang them with but the use of the knives is going to tie the knot. On the other hand, if they had just kept it to fists then it is highly unlikely they would have seen the inside of a cell for very long at all.
GasBandit
Staff member
Well, as soon as he stops blaming the state of the union on the "mess he inherited," maybe he can claim ownership of the good stuff.
Necronic
Staff member
It's really hard not to see his presidency as inheriting a mess though. One of the largest recessions in history and 2 intractable wars. Only person I can think of who had similar difficulties on coming into office was Reagan (with the Cold War and the economic shitstorm that was going on then).
Because theres no difference between a black person and a klansman other than the fact that there are people that hate them.
Dave
Staff member
If someone was telling me that I was not a human and that I should be hanged, I think I'd be a bit on the violent side. The problem is, this only reinforces their beliefs. But you still just can't do stuff like this. Freedom of speech is for shit you hate just as much as shit you agree with.
Because hating a Klansman for being a Klansman is no different than hating a Black person for being Black.
--Patrick
Justice Clarence Thomas asks a question during oral arguments for the first time in ten years. Apparently now that he has to make his own decisions, it's time for him to do his damn job.
Are you serious? The klan is a terrorist organization.
Not on a level provable enough to disband them. It's the same issue with the Neo-Nazis and other white supremacists: they have friends at high levels of the government who always tip them off or hinder investigations that would prove fruitful so we never get enough evidence to do more than imprison a few cells at a time. We know they've done all kinds of things in the past but we can't prove it of the current membership so stuff like this happens.