anon_
4mo ago
There is a political process by which a legislative branch can pass institutional safeguards.
Look at the city of Oakland, they've got so many that they've all but hobbled their police department with them. By choice.
anon_
4mo ago
He indeed had a veto against obeying that illegal order. His obedience was a personal moral failing and he deserves shame to be heaped onto him.
I suspect you are not really willing to bite this bullet.
If you are, then I guess I commend you, but I'm not particularly willing to concede to some future Dem DHS that they can decline to enforce immigration law (and in doing so veto Congress' law) because they believe it's illegal and/or immoral. In a world where large parts of the country deeply disagrees with what is legal & moral, an individual veto is like throwing policy into the wind.
I'd also note that "name and shame" is the weakest possible form of accountability. The strongest is ensuring accountability through the ballot box.
anon_
4mo ago
Those individuals were carrying out the will of the elected officials that supervise those departments. As well they generally should (except when those officials ask things that are beyond the pale) we can't have a democracy and also give the individuals that are staffing that agency at the time veto power over everyone else.
anon_
4mo ago
Just to distinguish, the Nile, Tigris and Euphrates are canonically the breadbaskets of the ancient world and are largely Arab.
The Arab States in the Gulf, not so much.
anon_
4mo ago
The presidency tends to flip flop because Americans periodically vote for change.
I wouldn’t accept a later run if I were him.
anon_
4mo ago
Brother the folks running Iran are not better. They also live off oil revenue and are degenerate.
The worse thing about Iran is that they rule over a populace with decent innate potential (well, subtracting anyone with means and will to leave).
anon_
4mo ago
Miller is barely beating Obama's run rate at deporting immigrants. 500K a year instead of Obama's 400K. At this rate he'll be done in (checks notes) 20 years.
Whether it's his fault or he's just outmatched by the liberal barbed wire, he's certainly not "getting things done".
anon_
4mo ago
To be fair, a Tomahawk that is mistargeted is a few million we could have spent actually hitting the right target.
anon_
4mo ago
Sure. But if he offends you aesthetically and not on the merits, then don't start in on a death toll.
I understand that there was demand for someone to put on a crisp suit and portray an image of careful and meticulous balance. My take that is that aesthetic gloss is, at best, neutral to the actual thing.
anon_
4mo ago
Man, how many Japanese kids and teachers were incinerated when we firebombed Tokyo? War is terrible, that's why we shouldn't be overly fond of it.
What's remarkable is less about what happened from 2019 to 2026 and more about what happened in the time prior to that. I'm all for targeted munitions and accurate intelligence and whatnot, but all kinetic action is, frankly, a broadsword. We're lying to ourselves if we imagine otherwise.
I don't even like Hegseth, he's not a particular good SecDefWar. But he's right that the military's job is to be lethal. If you want to avoid all that, that's on State.
anon_
4mo ago
Indeed, it makes my point.
A political actor can never make more in demands than the amount of effort it would take to obliterate you
anon_
4mo ago
I think there's a boundary between being ignored, and asking for more than your weight.
Defecting and trying to make it costly because you wouldn't bargain to get your interests is liable to make pelicans think that energy is best spent destroying you utterly.
anon_
4mo ago
If Lockheed asked for that term, would it have been appropriate?
Any even if one elected government agreed to it, would it be sensible for it to bind the next one?
anon_
4mo ago
I’m not sure what the “specific contract” point means here?
The disagreement (as I understand) was about how the terms in the contract would work.
( And the supply chain designation is a red herring, it’s just escalation on DOW side )
anon_
4mo ago
Do you think Trump should have asked Lockheed if he can bomb Iran? Or are you saying he had the freedom to contract with a different company to make a competing F35?
anon_
4mo ago
Not so much, when you look at intersectional wokeness and the “all the evils are connected”.
Look for example at the pro-Palestinian folks talking about how anti-LGBT activism is connected to climate is connected to colonialism.
anon_
4mo ago
Ah yeah, sorry, context was lost there.
I agree tech isn’t pro-republican.
I even agree it’s not anti-woke, but it does represent within woke a fairly distinct faction,
anon_
4mo ago
In relative terms, yes.
Unless you think they weren’t sincere, but I see no reason to think that
anon_
4mo ago
I have no idea what fantasy you have right now but tech is woke as af. I was there.
I think it's a specific kind of woke. Flattening it is a huge mistake.
Of course you can't have tech without the autistic MtFs and the ACE chicks, and so there's a very predictable LGBT contingent. And the companies are all extremely woke on BLM/DEI side and all that. But they are not "capitalism is systemic plunder of the poor" wokes or "we stand with Iran" wokes.
anon_
4mo ago
I think it's not just about being weak, but about accurately assessing your relative position.
I think my standard for beyond the pale is something like "beat the living jesus out of the guy that wasn't resisting", not break a gate and steal a trifling amount of money.
More options
Context Copy link