@phosphorus2's banner p

phosphorus2


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2024 September 19 03:44:36 UTC

				

User ID: 3264

phosphorus2


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2024 September 19 03:44:36 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3264

Biden didn't really ignore the law on immigration. One could make the argument (which I would agree with) that he ignored the spirit of what the law intended, but his parole abuse followed the letter since every applicant technically received an individual decision, and the DHS asserted individualized "significant public benefit" findings. The definitions of those things were so wishy washy that it could mean almost anything.

I would consider "pretending words mean what we want them to mean instead of what they actually mean so we can technically follow the law" the same as just ignoring the law.

Immigration law is a trainwreck in general, so there are tons. One particularly noteworthy issue that Biden abused was the parole authority. This is something the 2024 bill would have ameliorated somewhat. Then Trump cynically torpedoed that bill with MAGA promising he'd deliver a much stronger bill if he became President. Then he did almost nothing statutorily.

It is a trainwreck because one side just ignores the law. Look at your example of Biden's parole abuse. The law says that the pres admin can temporarily parole individuals into the US on a case by case basis. Biden admin parole in millions of him over his term, this was done categorically, not at all case by case.

Why rely on another law to fix parole? The original law is already clear and is ignored. Trump was able to shut down the border with the laws on the books, what is another law that gives concession to the pro side going to do?

Maybe you should try to consider why those muslims hate you, and no, scantily clad blondes munching on burgers and freedom fries is not the reason.

I mean that's definetly part of it. Bush got shit for it but yeah, "they hate us for our freedoms". There are some grivences here, but most of it is wahh wahh wahh why don't you follow sharia law? Why do attack muslims who were doing jihad? Why don't you hate da Joos like us?

e.g.:

The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

(a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest.

We call you to all of this that you may be freed from that which you have become caught up in; that you may be freed from the deceptive lies that you are a great nation, that your leaders spread amongst you to conceal from you the despicable state to which you have reached.

...

You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?

...

You are a nation that exploits women like consumer products or advertising tools calling upon customers to purchase them. You use women to serve passengers, visitors, and strangers to increase your profit margins. You then rant that you support the liberation of women.

Do you have any evidence that this was the ayatollah's personal policy, as opposed to a broader regime policy?

Per Article 110 of Iran's Constitution, the ayatollah's personal policy IS the regime policy.

What’s your evidence he wasn’t acting in their national self-interest?

I actually got Khamenei and Khomeini mixed up, but I don't think it changes much as they were both islamic fundamtalists who did stupid things.

Going back to Khomeini, the hostage crisis. Which Khamenei strongly supported. What did they get kidnapping a bunch of diplomats? They got to feel great sticking it to the great satan? What did they lose? They pissed off a superpower who then donated a bunch of military equipment to Iraq, a country that invaded them like a year after Iran pissed off its old superpower ally. To quote la wik:

The Iraqi invasion of Iran took place less than a year after the hostage-taking of American embassy employees in Tehran. According to journalist Stephen Kinzer, the rapid deterioration of American–Iranian relations, from close allies to hostile adversaries, emboldened Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to launch the invasion. Kinzer further argues that the United States’ hostility toward Iran subsequently influenced its decision to support Iraq after the war began to turn against Hussein.[153] The United States supplied Iraq with, among other things, "helicopters and satellite intelligence that was used in selecting bombing targets." This assistance "deepened and widened anti-American feeling in Iran."

If Iran had wanted to just throw of the American yoke and not been so annoying about they'd be in much better shape. Look at the Vietnamese - they kicked the US out, they did it without Ho Chi Minh yelling "death to America" for 50 years, and today in 2026 the US and Vietnam get along just fine, we're even somewhat friendly. But of course Iran can't help themselves, paramount is defeating the great satan. This is the general theme - they just can't help themselves.

Another example - the Fatwa against Salman Rushdie. What does Iran get from this? I can't think of anything but to satisfy some internal muslim purity demand. What did they lose? A decade of sour relations with the UK and Europe. And they made him famous, and he sold a ton of books.

More recently - some girl doesn't wear her hijab right so they kill her. What does Iran gain from this? International condemnation, international sanctions, half a year of internal protests where they shoot hundreds more. Shocking that Iran's most educated and (what would be) their most productive citizens don't want to live in that envornment. Shocking their elite human capital doesn't want to live in an islamic theocracy. Really serves the national interest to scare those people off, but hey - at least allah is happy.

Honestly there are like a million things like this of Iran being stupid because they're led by islamic fundamentalists. Is it in Iran's interest to keep picking fights with Israel? What exactly is the root of that conflict, Iran's security needs? Or because they don't like da Joos? How exactly is their nuclear weapons program going? They endure decades of economic isolation, for what? Where are the nukes? Did they stick it to the great satan with the nukes, or did they get no nukes and get bombed? There are ways to defend yourself without making yourself an international pariah, but they can't help but fund every terrorist org in existence. Like oh my god, shocking they get regularly bombed.

Ok to engage in realpolitik / geostrategic logic the first assumption is that states are rational actors acting in their own self interest. I dont think khomeni was a rational actor, he was an islamic fundamtalist. I think the junta giving direction to the clerics would be a much better situation, if that is actually the case.

No, I think killing muslims who hate me is a good thing in and of itself. But tbh if I were president I dont think I'd have started this war and I dont think as it stands the benefits have been worth the costs.

Do they believe the exact same thing? It doesnt seem so to me. The IRGC strikes me as a military outfit before a religious one. Khomeni was primarily a cleric. Dealing with a military junta seems leagues better than an theocracy, even if they both hate america.

None of this has benefitted a single American that is not a zionist.

Killing the "death to america" leader whose foreign policy was "export islamic revolution" seems prima facie to benefit me a lot

most of them are not sexual predators within their own families.

Tangental, but third worlders in the yookay and in general have wildly different and alien social mores.

The majority of UK pakistani marriages are to their first cousins