In this first video we have a native of Mosul who is returning to visit after a long absence. His friends give insight into life under Daesh and also the fears that many in Mosul feel for the future.
But it is not a simple matter to remove the militants who have ruled Mosul, as this video makes clear.
And for many in the city there is still the pain and horror of a war that still burns red hot.
This war will not end with Mosul. But perhaps, as the last scene in the first video shows, a new future can begin with Mosul.
108 comments:
The Iranians hope to create a corridor through the Sunni lands clear to Damascus. They've even got a paved highway under consideration. (Mattis doesn't seem to be properly considering this, being probably too focused on the short-term tactical situation.) It may not run through Mosul (probably run to the south), but I think the notion guarantees that residents of Zeyad's imagined Sunnistan, including the residents of Mosul, will have little peace for the foreseeable future.
(The residents of Mosul would probably have been better off trying to join the fledgling Kurdistan, but the Arab folks on the western bank of the river just weren't interested in that, and I don't think the Kurds wanted to take them in either.)
TrumpTweets: Shorthands is carryin’ on ‘bout the Russian/collusion investigation again this morning.
(The residents of Mosul would probably have been better off trying to join the fledgling Kurdistan, but the Arab folks on the western bank of the river just weren't interested in that, and I don't think the Kurds wanted to take them in either.)
It probably wouldn't sit well with Turkey either.
They've unveiled the McConnell's health care bill. It looks to me a lot like the other one.
"It looks to me a lot like the other one."
That is probably intentional. It'll make it easier to reconcile the two when the time comes for that.
I didn't like the other one and I don't like this one either.
Cuts to Medicaid
They are basically transferring money from programs for those who need them to function to the wealthier segment of society. It is a law based on greed, not a law that is designed to lower any deficits.
Trump says no tapes. Doesn't surprise me. Either that there aren't tapes or that he might lie about it.
"I didn't like the other one and I don't like this one either."
I find myself in the same position. I don't believe the Republicans in Congress (as opposed to Shorthands himself) bother too much to try to conceal their intent to cut medical assistance to the lower income brackets in order to pave the way for tax cuts for the higher income brackets. Shorthands may want to pretend otherwise, but most Congressional Republicans don't bother with the pretense.
But, they've talked themselves on to the horns of a dilemma. ObamaCare is (basically) the best idea for a national health care policy that the Republican ever came up with. (It was based originally on an idea that came out of the arch-conservative Heritage Foundation. It was formed up a bit more when put into practice in Massachusetts under then Governor Mitt Romney.) They do not have a better idea; that was the best they could come up with, probably the best they are ever gonna come up with. (Which is not to say there aren't better ideas, just not ones that would ever have been floated by the arch-conservative wing of the Republican Party.) I won't go into the process by which Obama stole the Republican Plan because he thought he could get them to agree to pass it, only to have them denounce their own plan because he was now on-board with it--that's rather twisted and whole story in itself.
But, they've talked themselves into a dilemma. They can't come up with a better plan, so any plan they come up with will be noticeably worse, and their constituents will eventually notice that punish them for it, eventually. But, not coming up with a plan after having promised the reactionary right-wing FoxNews and Breitbart crowd that they were going to repeal ObamaCare will get that segment of their base to turn on them now.
This is not a good place to be. There are no good options for them.
There are no good options for them.
Actually there is. Do the right thing for the country. If they will be punished by their base now if they don't follow through with repealing the ACA and they will be punished by the rest of the country, who actually like some of the ACA's benefits, later then they really have nothing to lose. So do the right thing and actually come up with a bill that will fix the ACA rather than gut it. Take their original plan and polish it up and steal it back from Obama. Because if they pass this bill that hurts so many people they will lose. As will the country.
Lee: "The residents of Mosul would probably have been better off trying to join the fledgling Kurdistan, but the Arab folks on the western bank of the river just weren't interested in that"
You're talking tactical decisions made on the fly in a singular moment in history. The folks in those parts base their decisions on bloodlines and land held or conquered through millennia.
Ya'll yanks, babies as you are when it comes to nationhood, and novices that you are when it comes to "people" (as in a distinct people, not just Homo Sapiens all), seem unable to understand what's at stake. No people want to go willingly the way of the Cherokee - to name just ONE of the many people who were less than well served by "immigration".
"Actually there is. Do the right thing for the country."
That's not a good option for them. It may be good for the country, but they've long ago quit positioning themselves to benefit from that; they went another way.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
One thing I don't need is some blond sumbitch tryin’ to be tellin’ me ‘bout the Cherokee.
Fareed Zacharia expounds on a point I made the other day about knee-jerk military escalation, without any plan for an end game, being the norm when the military is put in charge of any situation which ultimately requires a political solution. I.e. pretty much all of our entanglements from Afghanistan east to Israel. WashingtonPost
Apparently General Mattis doesn't like having the State Department looking over his shoulder while he's ramping up our military presence in Afghanistan. Politico.com
By the way, in his official White House response to a Congressional inquiry, Shorthands has just today told the House Intelligence Committee that he has ‘no idea’ whether or not his White House office has been bugged. Politico.com
Kinda the kinda thing I'd expect him to know ‘bout; probably something he really oughta look into in case there's any question ‘bout it.
That last Politico.com article I referred to just above has been revised.
"But late Friday evening, hours after POLITICO and other news
outlets pressed for comment, and as criticism mounted, State
Department spokeswomen Heather Nauert announced that Secretary
of State Rex Tillerson had not yet decided what to do about SRAP."
The State Department bureaus responsible for the Afghan/Pakistan areas are now ‘under review’ and their fates are ‘not yet decided’ instead of them being slated for closing.
Trump has been focusing a lot on the Russia probe lately. I can't help but wonder if it is to try to divert attention away from the awful health care bill now proposed in the Senate.
I just listened to Kellyanne Conway saying there are no cuts to Medicaid. She has read the whole bill and says there are no cuts to Medicaid. Must be one of those alternative facts she deals in.
Earlier in the day, Conaway declined to say if he would issue a subpoena for the tapes if he doesn’t get a satisfactory answer. “I don’t talk about stuff I might do,” Conaway said. But some Democrats have signaled that’s their preferred response if the White House continues to stonewall.
Apparently Trump's tweets are not being take seriously. Can't imagine why.
Now if Petes were still around he might be interested in this.
The Gregorian chant, best known as the solemn music sung by robed monks of old, is enjoying a 21st-century revival — and the Twin Cities are at the heart of it this week.
Experts and students of the ancient sacred music from across the globe have gathered for what is billed as “the most in-depth teaching conference ... on sacred music in the world.” They’re honing their musical skills and bringing the solemn choral notes to several St. Paul churches.
Lee: "One thing I don't need is some blond sumbitch tryin’ to be tellin’ me ‘bout the Cherokee."
Ayo hol up! First of all I'm not all that blond. Second I be tellin' ya'll whatever the hell I feel like tellin' ya'll. Got that chump?
Greatness:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jj4nJ1YEAp4
Another nugget for y'all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AWCRkcCKm8
Yet'nuther:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKN0HHyM3Hk
Watch it!
*Deep mournful sigh*
A passing thought I must write down. What happens if the Republican controlled government bankrupts the majority of Americans by forcing them to shoulder more of the financial & emotional costs of caring for our growing elderly population? Who will they have left to actually buy the products that are sold by our large corporations which plumps up the balance sheets of our wealthiest citizens? The Chinese? The Russians? Europe? Somehow I don't see those people filling the bill.
This weekend there was a retreat led by the Koch brothers and their cohorts. For many of them the health care bill slithering its way out of the Senate doesn't cut deep enough. One has to wonder, is this the way revolutions start?
"What happens if the Republican controlled government bankrupts
the majority of Americans by forcing them to shoulder more of the
financial & emotional costs of caring for our growing elderly
population?"
You have identified one of the flaws in the ‘supply-side’ economic theories popular with the Republican Party. It goes way beyond merely the cost of medical care for the elderly. As more and more of the money supply is gathered into fewer and fewer ever higher piles, the customers disappear, commerce stops. Viable democracy requires a broad-based buy-in from a stable and broad middle class. Supply-side economics kills off that required population. That is not an accident. That is by design.
TrumpTweets: Another morning ragging about the Russian investigation. Man's fixated on that, can't quit tweeting on the subject. It owns him.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear argument on the subject of Shorthands' 90 day ban on travel from Six Majority Muslim Countries. More surprisingly, it has agreed to lift the Writs of Prohibition which forbade the administration from enforcing the travel ban. CBSNews I find this curious, as the 90 days expired long ago, and it would seem to be a moot point now, but I assume somebody'll explain this to me eventually.
Supply-side economics kills off that required population. That is not an accident. That is by design.
To what end?
Man's fixated on that, can't quit tweeting on the subject. It owns him.
Two things I can think of. One, it's a diversionary tactic to avoid talking about the health care bill. Two, because there is something that he really is guilty of and a continuing investigation may bring that to light.
More surprisingly, it has agreed to lift the Writs of Prohibition which forbade the administration from enforcing the travel ban.
I haven't read the link yet, but perhaps they are setting precedence for future cases?
"To what end?"
Keeping the money (and power) for themselves. (Woulda thought that'd been obvious.)
Keeping the money (and power) for themselves. (Woulda thought that'd been obvious.)
There won't be much money or power if the economy and country collapse. Just ask Venezuela. Yes, I realize the economics may be different, but the human failing (greed) is not.
The point isn't to have enough money for Venezuela, just to have enough for the people who bled out
Petróleos into offshore bank accounts while it was still makin’ money.
Title: ‘Asia and the Fall of Coal’ in TheDiplomat. I'm not familiar with the author, but he seems to have a fair command of the numbers and trends in question.
Lee: "As more and more of the money supply is gathered into fewer and fewer ever higher piles, the customers disappear, commerce stops. Viable democracy requires a broad-based buy-in from a stable and broad middle class. Supply-side economics kills off that required population. That is not an accident. That is by design."
And mass immigration is geared to that very same end, can't you see that? It completely wrecks the middle classes by driving wages down, by adding hordes of workers ready to accept low wages. It gives the "haves" the possibility to pit one group against another and have'em stay focused on that while the "haves" steal from them all.
Indeed, it's by design. And unless you can acknowledge how mass immigration adds to the problem, you're no help at all. And you're conditioned by media, the media controlled by the "haves" to think you should be made to feel bad about yourself for realising this. You're part of the problem.
Just look to Japan for a society where they are even older than in America and they have zero or even negative "growth", and STILL the old folks enjoy all the services they are due and the people have at least the same purchasing power as in any other advanced nation.
You are conditioned to believe you need "growth", even though eternal growth means an inevitable crash - from resource extinction, over-population or the eventual wars to come.
But really, why is "growth" something we inherently need? Have you asked yourselves that? Who does it really serve?
Lynnette: "*Deep mournful sigh*"
I can't really take it in another way than that comment was made at some of my previous posts. If that's the case, which one? Because I can't really figure why you would mournfully sigh, deeply even, in responce to any of those.
Anyhow, here's 'nother piece of music greatness for y'all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqMy-izydsQ
Real talent. Not some masss produces crap.
"But really, why is ‘growth’ something we inherently need?"
While you're on the subject of folks being ‘conditioned’ I think you should take a look at yourself. I've said repeatedly that I'm not in favor of allowing immigration ‘en masse’, that each case should be evaluated individually. I've said repeatedly that the United States doesn't need more people, we've got enough people already.
But, you are incapable of absorbing that information on account of I'm not a raging bigot. You have seemingly been ‘conditioned’ to believe that one is either a raging bigot, such as yourself, or one is in favor or one is in favor of immigration en masse. You seem unable to absorb the idea that there is any other position to be held on the subject.
Don't be babblin’ at me about being ‘conditioned’; you're the one who suffers from it, not me.
No Lee, I am not. How could I be "conditioned" when my point of view is so often degraded and villified. It's not like I'm taking the easy way. I've rather broken from the conditioning and think for myself.
And, regardless of your stance against "more people coming into the USA", what do you do about it? How do you make that case politically?
Also, when it comes down to "babblin", what about quoting someone as you just now did and then respond with something not at all related to the quote you chose? How's that for just "babblin"?
"…what about quoting someone as you just now did and then
respond with something not at all related to the quote you chose?"
Marcus @ Tue Jun 27, 12:46:00 pm
Perhaps you ought to look again.
"But really, why is ‘growth’ something we inherently need?"
Marcus @ Tue Jun 27, 12:13:00 pm (and the object of my quote
)
" I've said repeatedly that the United States doesn't need more
people, we've got enough people already."
Lee C. @ Tue Jun 27, 12:31:00 pm (first paragraph)
Maybe it will occur to you eventually that those are, in fact, related. Or, maybe not, maybe it's outside your ken on account of it's a third position to forced choice of two polar opposite positions, and you don't, and can't, acknowledge the possibility that such a third position may exist.
Also, again, I'll be babblin' as much as I feel like. PeteS can ban me if he so chooses, and maybe Lynnette has that option too, I don't know. But I for sure will NOT stop "babblin'" on account of you Lee.
And if I do get banned from here, then I will feel it would be unjust because I do most of the time try to contribute in a constructive, if non-PC, way. Granted I do sometimes step out of bounds, but not very often. Really.
And until I get banned, you Lee C can just plain stop tryin' tellin' me what I can or cannot say. M'kay?
"I'll be babblin' as much as I feel like."
Yes, apparently so. But, I've had enough of it for now.
So…
Ciao for now.
F*kin A!!! I outlasted Lee C for once. That's gotta be a first.
Still, Lynnette, what did you mean by: "*Deep mournful sigh*"
"That's gotta be a first."
Not a first. You were just drunk and don't remember. (Probably prove to be the case here too, in the end.)
@ Lynnette,
Just a ‘by the way’ type of note here. I mentioned before that…
"…it would seem to be a moot point now, but I assume
somebody'll explain this to me eventually."
Lee C. @ Mon Jun 26, 11:52:00 am ↑↑
Turns out the Supreme Court have told both parties to be ready to explain in their briefs for the October hearing why it's not a moot point already.
Whatever. My side is on the rise and will win eventuallly. Ya'll fencestraddlers might end up on either side and I don't much care which.
I just had a chance to read all of the comments, although not time to check out Lee's coal link. I will do that tonight. But just for now:
Still, Lynnette, what did you mean by: "*Deep mournful sigh*"
That was in response to that last song, I assume you, posted under "Unknown".
The last line taken from the movie Casablanca, "Here's looking at you, kid", strikes me as sad. While I liked the movie in general, I didn't like the ending where they parted ways.
Just in case Marcus is less drunk when he returns…
"Ya'll fencestraddlers might end up on either side…"
Maybe when you're sober this will sink in: I'm not on the fence!
I have a grounded position. It's not your position; I'm not a raging bigot and I don't intend to become one. Neither am I in favor of unrestrained mass immigration, as much has you wish to pretend that I have to be one or the other, I do not have to be one or the other. There are other positions than the two you wish to pretend are the only possibilities. You are wrong; your pretense is wrong; I don't have to pretend along with you.
From my paper today:
A federal judge in Detroit has suspended the deportations of scores of Iraqi nationals nationwide who advocates say could face persecution, torture or death upon returning to their native country. US District Judge Mark Goldsmith issued a stay of removal for about 1,444 Iraqi nationals recently rounded up across the country, including about 85 who are in detention and were expected to be removed as early as Tuesday. These individuals will now have two more weeks to challenge their deportations.
Somehow I doubt that the greatest threat to our country lays with these people. I suspect it is living in a White House on Pennsylvania Ave.
I liked that last one, Marcus. Great guitar.
Here's one for you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zLfCnGVeL4
Ran out of time...
"I suspect it is living in a White House on Pennsylvania Ave."
You'll have a hard time getting him deported.
Lol!
I'd settle for impeachment.
Lynnette:
"That was in response to that last song, I assume you, posted under "Unknown".
The last line taken from the movie Casablanca, "Here's looking at you, kid", strikes me as sad. While I liked the movie in general, I didn't like the ending where they parted ways."
Yes, I posted that as "Unknown", not deliberately. And thank you for the explanation regarding your "sigh"-comment. I understood that the wrong way, as you sighing at my posts.
Also, GREAT song you linked to. I've listened to it once and am playing it again right now.
Lee: "I have a grounded position."
I say you have an untenable position. You acknowledge problems but have no viable solutions to them. And you're extremely prone to mental obedience when it comes to the mainstream media agenda de jour.
Lemming, that's the most fitting term that comes to mind.
Here's another song for you Lynnette:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS6n2Hx9Ykk
One of the best ones ever recorded IMO.
"You acknowledge problems but have no viable solutions to them."
You refusale to acknowledge, or even to notice, the solutions I gave you does not render them non-viable.
On the other hand, I recall that, when pressed, you told us that your solutions involved not so much slaughter of your minorities (which you hint at darkly but refuse to admit in the clear) as it does ‘transporting’ them. But, you don't know how you're gonna get ‘em to board the transport, and you don't know to where you're gonna transport ‛em. That is the very definition of a non-viable solution--that is political fantasy on an epic scale.
You are no position to claim to see lemmings.
The Australians did it. They made it a policy that NO (not one) boat "refugee" would be allowed into Australia. It worked.
Post Script:
And, just as a ‛by the way’ mention, going by, to further refute your rote assertions (I believe you have again mistaken the positions of your imaginary friends Scooter and Nils for what you assert to be my position): My position on immigration is hardly mainstream for either of our major political parties, or either media camps, mainstream or right-wing-crazies.
"The Australians did it."
Let's see you adopt the Australian policy and make it policy that no Muslims shall be allowed into Sweden--oh wait, they're already there. (I believe this is technically called too damn late. So, what else ya got?)
@ Lynnette,
I think this analysis is substantially correct:
" Any Republican anticipating a tough race in either 2018 or 2020
should be rooting hard for legislative ineptitude [on the part of
the Republican leadership].
"For all the angry snarls from the conservative base over any failure
to repeal Obamacare, it is hard to envision how any voter would be
attracted to a health care plan that offers less coverage, higher
deductibles and a real risk of exceeding a lifetime cap on benefits.
And all this before $772 billion in planned cuts to Medicaid kick in.
"In short, the only thing worse politically for the Republicans than
keeping Obamacare is passing Ryan-McConnell-Trump-care."
RollCall
Shorthands has accepted an invitation from President Macron of France to a Bastille Day celebration in Paris.
Perhaps he is unaware that Macron invited Putin to an opening of a Russia themed exhibit at the palace of Versailles only to rip Putin a new one when Putin got there.
It will be interesting I ‘spect.
Just dropped in quickly to vent. Have you ever noticed that some people who think they are competent really aren't? And it makes more work for those who try to fix their errors?
"…some people who think they are competent really aren't…"
It's often seemed to me that those people are most often folks who got promoted up out of the sales department into management.
"Out here everyone gets it: China has Trump’s number. Its
officials were afraid of him at first — with his tough trade talk.
But they quickly realized how easy it was to distract him with
shiny objects, like promises to defuse the North Korea threat
for him or by giving stale sector-specific trade concessions,
such as for American beef exports to China — things China has
promised multiple presidents before — that Trump could brag
about.
"Beijing watched Trump threaten to abandon America’s
adherence to the one-China policy if he did not get trade
concessions — and then just fold the minute China’s president,
Xi Jinping, said he would not take a phone call from Trump
unless he reaffirmed the ‘One-China’ policy."
Thomas Friedman writing in the New York Times
I just read the article on coal. One thing that some people tend to forget is that the United States is not the only major economic power in the world. There are others that can move the global economy too. China is one such power. If they are moving away from coal then perhaps this was fortunate:
In the United States, plans were made to develop coal export ports along the West Coast, though local opposition meant America never got to cash in on the coal boom.
It might have been a short lived economic boost.
One can only hope that our business executives are more savvy than is our current government on what will be the profitable investment choice of the future with regard to energy sources.
"One can only hope that our business executives are more
savvy than is our current government…"
It is quite possible that the renewable energy industries have rooted enough that it will be impossible for Shorthands' policies to dislodge them, no matter how beholden he is to those who currently own large stores of fossil fuels and do not want them to lose their value and who therefore resist the development of renewable energy sources. It may be beyond his ability to protect his fossil fuel owning supporters from the future.
We shall see. (He will compromise our country's future economic position, no doubt about that, but by how much is yet uncertain.)
It looks like even Republicans are getting tired of Trump's Tweets.
Republican lawmakers were caught off-guard by President Donald Trump's personal attack on "Morning Joe" co-host Mika Brzezinski Thursday, with several saying the remarks were unbecoming of his office.
(He will compromise our country's future economic position, no doubt about that, but by how much is yet uncertain.)
He represents the worst of us. It is not only our economic position that he will compromise. Sad, very sad.
"It looks like even Republicans are getting tired of Trump's Tweets."
As long as he's holding around a 40% favorability rate they're not gonna cross ‘im. Maybe bitch a little, and then blow it off.
While it seems like he's been in office for years, it's actually only been five months. We will see.
Well, assuming they manage to pass the TrumpCare package, his favorability will start dropping fairly rapidly. So, you can hope for that to happen I guess.
Shorthands has a new health care plan. He's proposing that they repeal ObamaCare outright; don't bother with any replacement legislation just now, and then maybe worry later about what comes later. TrumpTweets
My guess is that'll work for the right-winger/libertarian element of the Republican Party, but I don't think there's gonna be enough support for that idea in the Senate to get it even a majority, much less overcome a filibuster.
Well, assuming they manage to pass the TrumpCare package, his favorability will start dropping fairly rapidly. So, you can hope for that to happen I guess.
No. As much as I dislike Trump I would not advocate shooting the country in the foot to get rid of him.
What I find so sad is that this extreme conservative element in government has gained such sway that they would even consider throwing so many people under the bus. It really does come down to who we are as a people.
It looks like Iraqi forces have retaken the al-Nuri Mosque.
Iraq's military has seized the remains of the Great Mosque of al-Nuri -- where Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared the ISIS "caliphate" in 2014 -- and is now engaged in fierce street-to-street fighting for the last several hundred meters of Mosul's Old City.
Troops are just 600 meters from the Tigris River, which marks the final few blocks of western Mosul still under ISIS control.
The mosque was destroyed by ISIS fighters last week as Iraqi forces edged closer.
"I would not advocate shooting the country in the foot to get rid of him."
Desperate times may call for desperate measures. But, it appears that Shorthands' little twitterburst this morning, calling for repeal of ObamaCare without a replacement, may have thrown the Republicans into even further disarray--making it less likely that they'll manage to come to agreement on anything, and leaving ObamaCare to stumble along still not fixed.
Lynnette: "It looks like even Republicans are getting tired of Trump's Tweets."
That whole deal is what we in Sweden call "a storm in a glass of water".
Meaning, a whole lot of noice and bellyaching about nothing, really.
Which leads to: not a lot of people who went for Trump are gonna change their minds due to that complete bullshit.
You think folks are gonna go like : "Oh, how rude of him! Now I DO want a gazillion migrants to get in through our southern borders, becauz Trump tweeted bad."
Who is gonna change their opinion about Trump based on crude tweet today? No one. The folks who voted for him already knew who he was and most likely relish his bullying. And they are the ones who won.
Cue to Lee telli'n us they won but are still a minority. Yeah, yeah. They still won the competition that matters.
Lee: "On the other hand, I recall that, when pressed, you told us that your solutions involved not so much slaughter of your minorities (which you hint at darkly but refuse to admit in the clear) as it does ‘transporting’ them. But, you don't know how you're gonna get ‘em to board the transport, and you don't know to where you're gonna transport ‛em. That is the very definition of a non-viable solution--that is political fantasy on an epic scale."
I can't remember that we even had a discussion on that matter so I think you just habitually ascribe thoughts to me that I have not uttered.
As for transportation the obvious solutions are ships, trains and buses - maybe airplanes when needed. The harder part is gettin' 'em to go along with that without too much strife. Might pose a challenge. Carrrot and stick would be my best suggestion on how to deal with that. Cash payments for volontary exile and internment in not very cozy abodes for those who refuse maybe.
In any case, it can be done.
"The folks who voted for him already knew who he was and most
likely relish his bullying."
A lot of truth to that. I was surprised when Republican pollster Frank Luntz found his dedicated Trumpkins discussion group to be quite pleased that Trump had blind sided Prime Minister Duško Marković, and had gotten away with it (it was getting away with it part that they especially liked).
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"I can't remember that we even had a discussion on that matter…"
Well that's what happens when you're working your way up to being a cronic drunk. It's called ‘blackout’. You'll be experiencing more and more of that in the years to come.
Tell ya what… Why don't you come out with an official denial that you said what I sadi you said, and then I'll go get the quote and show you. But, first you gotta deny it, and thereby make it worth my while to go find it again.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"In any case, it can be done."
Among the many problems you didn't address is where you gonna send people who showed up without papers and were granted refuge? Send ‘em back? Back where? Their homelands don't want ‘em back and you got no documentation of their origins. (And that's only the tip of that iceberg.)
Yeah, I see the typo. I'll be okay; you'll figure it out.
And, ain't gonna be no wall. That they will notice. Blind-siding Duško Marković ain't gonna make up for that (especially seein’ as Shorthands ain't gonna get away with that twice.)
Which leads to: not a lot of people who went for Trump are gonna change their minds due to that complete bullshit.
Weeeellll, that depends on who you are looking at. Those who are into his bullying will not change their minds, no. But those who were casting the lesser of two evils vote may start to wonder. Those are the people who will be critical in the next election. Hillary won't be running again, so perhaps the lesser of two evils vote will find that Trump is now the candidate to avoid.
You think folks are gonna go like : "Oh, how rude of him! Now I DO want a gazillion migrants to get in through our southern borders, becauz Trump tweeted bad."
But here's the thing there really aren't a gazillion migrants rushing our southern border. Trump is fighting the last war with that. Ever since the Great Recession the number of illegal immigrants has fallen. So he would be spending a whole lot of money for nothing. That's what is known as a boondoggle. That can make you rather unpopular with the people out there who would prefer you to spend money on things that would benefit them.
Okay, I left this one for Lynnette, so she'd have a way to get into the discussion here, but she didn't avail herself of that opportunity; she went after another point instead, so…
"…internment in not very cozy abodes for those who refuse…"
Marcus @ Fri Jun 30, 08:54:00 pm ↑↑
Man's talkin’ concentration camps here. Just in case nobody noticed.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
I think we're gonna soon see the Republicans begin to attack one another over the failure of their ‘repeal and whatever’ for ObamaCare to clear its first hurdle (that hurdle being Republicans running into reality). The natural legacy of the dedicated Trumpkins is now starting to play itself out. The dissolution of the national Republican Party has begun.
Man's talkin’ concentration camps here. Just in case nobody noticed.
I hope that the world learned something from World War II, if not Marcus.
The natural legacy of the dedicated Trumpkins is now starting to play itself out. The dissolution of the national Republican Party has begun.
Perhaps this is necessary for its survival? In both parties we have seen the rise in influence of the more extreme branches. It has just been the Republican party that seems to have been overtaken by them to the extent we have now. For the country to survive as a united entity we need the rise of the more moderate voices that actually overtake the extremists. A counter revolution if you will. So if the Republican party does split, perhaps it can then marginalize the extremists. If not, then we have some serious problems. Marcus' internment camps may look more mainstream then. Or, welcome to Nazi Germany.
I'm going to see a totally escapist movie today (after I pick raspberries). Thank God the strawberries are done. I was starting to see them in my sleep!
Lee: "Man's talkin’ concentration camps here. Just in case nobody noticed."
You DO have a dark mind, and sadly you seem to be pulling poor Lynnette along with you. No I don't mean concentration camps, certainly not in the way they were designed first by the british in the Boer wars and then made infamous by the Germans in WW2.
What I do mean is stop the money. Simple. No nice apartments on swedish taxpayers dime to economic migrants. Make tent "cities" available for supposed "refugees". See how many would want to come then. If that's a dealbreaker they were not really "refugees" to begin with, were they.
We don't need barbed wire, armed guards or any of that. Just cut off free money and the tide will turn back.
It's not like they come all the way up here to the north because they really love the weather or the people here - they don't. It's not that the vast majority are fleeing from something other than poverty.
It's the money, the easy life, the wellfare checks and free housing that is the main pull factor. Take that away and there will most likely be a volontary exudous.
Lee: "Among the many problems you didn't address is where you gonna send people who showed up without papers and were granted refuge? Send ‘em back? Back where? Their homelands don't want ‘em back and you got no documentation of their origins."
Those are but a small portion. For the most part we do know their origin, or supposed origin at least, as they usually have to state that to apply for asylum.
But you do have a point in that many of their originating countries do not want 'em back. Which might to some extent describe why I do not want them here. In any case, that can be adressed by adding a requirement for agreeing to repatriations to any new foreign aid promises. We'll just pay their countries to take their own people back. Easy.
But you are not dumb enough not to know that already. You just toss out all the invalid arguments you have been taught and hope to muddy the waters. If WaPo told you the sun is an orange in the sky you'd be on the Internet claiming the sun is an orange in the sky, knowing full well the sun is not in fact an orange in the sky, you're that much of a shill Lee.
Lynnette: "Weeeellll, that depends on who you are looking at. Those who are into his bullying will not change their minds, no. But those who were casting the lesser of two evils vote may start to wonder. Those are the people who will be critical in the next election. Hillary won't be running again, so perhaps the lesser of two evils vote will find that Trump is now the candidate to avoid."
I'm by no means a dedicated "Trumpkin" and I savoured his win mostly because it was an anti-Hillary and anti-Media blast. Truth be told I am not that concerned with american politics.
Still, I will say this: it's better to double down than to apoligize. In politics I mean. Trump is best served by remaining Trump, warts and all. Start apologizing for who and what he is and he will win zero new supporters but risk losing the ones he have.
What will happen in your next election circus no one can know. It will all depend on the opponent and the topics of debate.
However I would not rule out a second Trump term, and I think you'd be very foolish yourself if yoou did so.
"Just cut off free money and the tide will turn back."
The incoming ‘tide’ has already been turned back, as we are already well aware. You are attempting to divert our attention from the problem you have identified, which is the people you already have.
Their ‘statement’ of origin is not documentation acceptable to reluctant countries of origin. Two of the three largest recipients of Swedish ‘foreign aid’ are Tanzania and Mozambique, not exactly high refugee producers in any case, and your countrymen aren't gonna cut off Afghanistan just because you want them to.
You've go no solutions there, just noises.
And you still haven't got the unwilling objects of your intended ‘repatriation’ on the boats and planes you seem to expect them to board so meekly.
Lee: "The incoming ‘tide’ has already been turned back, as we are already well aware. "
You lie. There are at least 3 million wannabe "refugees" in Turkey right now and the only thing holding them back is a shoddy deal made my the EU (Merkel) and Turkey (Erdogan). That floodgate could be opened any day if the wannabe Sultan decided that was in his interest.
Second, the Med-route. 13.500 africans arrived during monday-tuesday this very week. They part from (Hillary) ravaged Libya in unstable dingies and get picked up by ships belonging to "aid-workers" just a few clicks off the coast of Libya and then are offloaded in Italy.
That too could easily be shut down if the political will was there. Instead of "rescue ships" (full of commie do-gooders) send military escorted tug boats to take 'em back. Solved.
Lee: "And you still haven't got the unwilling objects of your intended ‘repatriation’ on the boats and planes you seem to expect them to board so meekly."
Meekly or not. I mean obviously the best way is to just get 'em to go along. If not then use force. Showing a willingness to use force will then get most others to go along, I should think.
How would you treat an illegal squatter in your own home? Just think 'bout that but on a grander scale.
It's not nuclear science, Lee.
"That floodgate could be opened any day if the wannabe Sultan
decided that was in his interest."
I don't ‘lie’ based on something you dream up that might happen, or might not. A floodgate that could open is not open. Cutting off aid to Tanzania and Mozambique will have no effect on human smugglers operating out of Libya. You have no solutions there, only noises.
"If not then use force."
Now that might constitute a solution. But I rather doubt your ability to get your compatriots to go along with that idea. And you may have to sink the boats at sea if their countries of origin aren't impressed by you cutting off foreign aid to third parties, as I suspect they will not be. That too may be more a little unacceptable to your compatriots.
@ Lynnette,
McConnell ain't quite impressed with Shorthands' new repeal without replace notion. AssociatedPress
Leee C wants infnite amounts of these people into the west:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm_zpGwKvgw
Infinite numbers.
No control.
Infinie!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7QErh_nvyY
However I would not rule out a second Trump term, and I think you'd be very foolish yourself if yoou did so.
Unfortunately I believe you could be right. After seeing him elected the first time I have little faith that voters will choose more wisely in the future.
McConnell ain't quite impressed with Shorthands' new repeal without replace notion.
I doubt it has anything to do with being concerned with American public opinion, considering the awful health care bill he wrote.
Perhaps what we need is a bill with a split personality. That is, let the states choose what type of health care they want. Those states who have elected officials who vote for McConnell's bill, or whatever the Republicans some up with, can operate under that, and those who oppose it can operate under some version of the ACA. So the people in Kentucky can see Medicaid cuts and higher premiums for older people. That is what they voted for.
"However I would not rule out a second Trump term…"
The first one was a fluke, and he has not requited himself well since the fluke fell upon him. The chances for two such long-shots falling his way in a row are pretty damn slim. (Not impossible, but pretty damn slim.)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"That is what they voted for."
I'm not sure what they voted for. I'm not sure they know what they voted for. Kentucky is a Medicaid expansion state. The percentage of uninsured in Kentucky has gone down from something like 20% to closer to 7% (off the top of my head; I'm not gonna bother to go look up the precise numbers again). Kentucky is also one of the poorer states; wages in Kentucky are comparitively low, so their ‘Kynect’ insurance (the name for ObamaCare in Kentucky) is heavily subsidized in practice.
They'll take a hell of a hit in Kentucky if ObamaCare is repealed. It's Kentucky, so they'll probably still vote for Shorthands next time ‘round, but McConnell might find himself in danger.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Leee C wants infnite amounts of these people into the west:"
Does that sort of idiocy work as argument among your Swedish counterparts? Or, maybe just among the Swedish fascists? (Just askin’; it wasn't worth a comment by itself, but I'm here on other matters, so….)
...but McConnell might find himself in danger.
Might be why he backed away from Trump's flip flop to repeal and don't replace position. However, his plan might be just as bad.
"However, [McConnell's] plan might be just as bad."
I question whether he has a plan just yet. Plan A would be to pass a Republican ‘repeal and replace’ when they get back from their long weekend. (With implementation put off until after the 2018 mid-term elections, for reasons that will probably be apparent to you.) I think Plan A will fail. I don't know if he's got a Plan B yet.
Always good to have a plan B.
Post a Comment