US Elections 2012 Part I: The Primaries/Caucus

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

With her?



Absolutely.

There's something horribly wrong with that picture..... oh, its that we have several guys glued to their little toys while this brain-melting cuteness sits looking lonely next to them.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Vexx

There's something horribly wrong with that picture..... oh, its that we have several guys glued to their little toys while this brain-melting cuteness sits looking lonely next to them.

i think that "Brain Melting Cuteness" is asking them to make a contract

[GundamFan0083]

Yikes! We went from the US election...to Agenda 21...to Muslim terrorists...to religion/science/physics...to cosplay cuteness...

So back to the US Election news.


Obama losing financial backing of big S.F. donor


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...#ixzz1meu1fjIx

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

I personally got an invitation to join the Freemasons. For real.

I still got the invitation letter.

They only got one requirement for me that I could not agree to. "You need to believe there is a god."

I believe in the possibility of higher dimensional beings. But it is one thing to believe in the possibility, and another to believe in it as a certainty. In all good conscience, I could not join the fraternity.

What the heck? You quoted text written by GundamFan0083, but have it saying I wrote that. Were you going to quote me but decided not to? Heh.

[Zetsubo]

Originally Posted by vallen chaos valiant

seriously, there is no right or wrong way to deal with china.

The fact is china and america are both capable of screwing the entire planet's economy all by themselves. Overnight, if needed be. An economic dispute between the two countries would be a financial version of m.a.d. And take the rest of the world down with them.

I would rather usa not play chicken with china. This means being serious and not trying to be a cowboy. Something neither romney nor santorum are qualified to do. And forget about gingrich.

amen !!!!!!!!!

[Zetsubo]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

With her?



Absolutely.



You should take a look at the numbers on ICE.

The thing about US invading Iran is just like another Arab Oil Embargo in the 1973-1974, tons of shit hitting the fan, but the world will still live. The problem is the political damage and aftermath that could lead to destabilisation of the entire Middle East, as Iran is well known to have supplied insurgents with advanced arms and equipment.



In proper English :

US screwed up the world economy in the past.
China will screw up the world economy in the future.

QED.

Go away TRL. There is nothing wrong with my English here.

With the IRAN issue.

Iran DOES NOT want a conflict with the USA:

In my laymans view these are the reasons.

1. Even though IRAN can screw the world oil prices and cause economic chaos... IRAN still does not want to enrage a western giant with more industrial and military muscle than any other single nation on the planet. Unless they are insane or stupid (Japan can explain to them why this is bad idea)

2. Iran will become the site of the conflict, the USA will barely feel the "on the ground effects of naked war" except in oil prices and economic issues. Unless IRAN develops tactical missiles that can reach the USA or trigger some global calamity that forces say China to launch their Tactical missiles, people in the USA will be going to wal-mart just the same.

3. Trident submarines can delete Iran as a solid piece of land.

4. Nimitz class carriers. Can do things that ought to make mankind ashamed of itself for creating such a thing.

5. Iran will be set back nearly 50 years in terms of economic and possibly nuclear power development if Israel gets the chance to take out the Iranian research centers.

6. America does have its own oil reserves (plus untapped ALASKA) and IRAN should remember that... so the USA can fuel a war with IRAN. Although it could end up a Pyrrhic victory for the USA.

6. Do not fight a nation that can reach you but you can't reach them.

[Zetsubo]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The more I understand science, the less I care about the concept of "making sense".

In the end, you don't need to be right to make sense. Making sense is just intuition, instinct, gut feeling. Plenty of real life sciences are counter-intuitive.

That's why I don't really care to differentiate between one religious belief from another in terms of "realism". For all we know, the universe could be created by an obscure deity worshipped by some tribe on an island, who occasionally throw chickens into a volcano to appease their Goddess. Reality never cares if people believe in it or not. So if there is a god or gods, I am prepared to think all religions can have a chance to be true.
Even Pastafarian. (No one said a religion had to be OLD.)

Exactly.

A lot of human knowledge is counter intuitive.

And it is said that no knowledge precedes observation.

So...

Ice floats on water.

Ice is a solid that has weight and looks like a transparent rock/stone.

Therefore it should sink.

However it does not... it makes no sense !

But when you know why it happens the way it does... AHHHHHH

Then it makes sense.

But before we understood the concepts of density... everyone accepted that ICE floats in water and that just became common sense... even though it made no sense.


LOL !


I think I just made no sense.

[Dhomochevsky]

Originally Posted by Zetsubo

With the IRAN issue.

Iran DOES NOT want a conflict with the USA

Well, that should be pretty much obvious.

Still we get the "Iran does something crazy" news every other day. It's like they do their best to provoke a conflict. They must be really stupid and/or crazy with a suicide tendency, hm?

Or maybe they are not.
With every one of those news, my suspicion grows, that there is a major spin on our news of Iran.
It just seems very implausible that they would work so hard on their own demise.

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky

Or maybe they are not.
With every one of those news, my suspicion grows, that there is a major spin on our news of Iran.
It just seems very implausible that they would work so hard on their own demise.

Could be some truth to that, for sure. The whole "wipe Isreal off the map" thing was a misinterpretation/mistranslation. Whether it was purposeful or not, when there was clarity on the issue, no one in the United States media cared to clarify it for the American people.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

@Religion: I don't think it's true that all religions are equally implausible. Some religions are simply more illogical then others, or more easily fit into a scientific world view.

We don't even need to discuss whether one religion seems more plausible than another. It's a futile discussion, anyway. The way I see it, the beliefs espoused by the religion are not as important as how the believer perceives them.

For example, even though I am not heavily religious (haven't read all of the texts and so on), I do accept a certain group's religious beliefs. However, the way that I perceive it is that these texts and interpretations were made by man, and thus are flawed. There may be bits of God in them, but they are not the direct word of God. As I encounter events in life and as science progresses, the religious beliefs interplay with them in a dynamic manner. It doesn't even matter what the religious beliefs are, or what the religion is: there are people in this group who hold the religious texts as the ultimate truth, who have a very narrow interpretation of what they must mean, and who would rather attempt to force reality to conform to their beliefs (even if it means their suffering and/or death) than to work with reality for what it is.

I haven't even described what the particular religious beliefs may be, and it really doesn't matter. One could argue that it's a matter of piety, but I think it's more about how high your heads are in the clouds, and how willing you are to accept reality.

Originally Posted by Zetsubo

With the IRAN issue.

Speaking of Iran... I'm sure this will sound weird, but is anyone else glad to see that Iran has arguably reached the state of becoming a nuclear power? The way I see it, it was going to happen sooner or later; all of the sanctions and weapon-waving merely delayed the inevitable. Now we can all move on, and treat them with a bit more respect. Thanks to the concept of "mutually assured destruction" I'm not particularly afraid of what they might do even if they gained nuclear weapons.

Actually, why are people so terrified of nuclear weapons? Yes, their destructive potential is greater than any other weapon type, but it's not like we're talking water balloons vs. bombs. These countries still have plenty of other destructive potential even with nuclear weapons. So then, why do the politicians make such a big deal about nuclear capabilities?

[Zetsubo]

Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky

Well, that should be pretty much obvious.

Still we get the "Iran does something crazy" news every other day. It's like they do their best to provoke a conflict. They must be really stupid and/or crazy with a suicide tendency, hm?

Or maybe they are not.
With every one of those news, my suspicion grows, that there is a major spin on our news of Iran.
It just seems very implausible that they would work so hard on their own demise.

So many people in the USA are gripped in a Matrix.

This matrix is fueled by...

INFOTAINMENT

Nothing exciting is happening in Fukushima is it ?

No danger ... ?

OK

Where is the "feeling of danger ?"

IRAN...

Lets post everything they do... and use the right trigger words to make it exciting and fear feeding... like a good movie.

The news industries MUST make a living... they MUST post/produce/find a scoop and story or their respective company will fail.

This story must be equal to or more exciting to the stories of their competitors.

And it must satiate the palate of their target demographics (FOX)

So they will take a simple thing a spin it into a story to make their living... and provide the "infotainment heroin" the some Americans are now addicted to.


Infotainment is a drug.

How do you explain that TLC (The LEARNING CHANNEL) devolved into the station that it is today.

Jon and Kate plus 8 !!! Help !!!

People are overwhelmed with information in this century and so only the exciting ones are getting through. I know people who have stock market streams and WEATHER APPS running on their iPhone ... BUT THEY AREN'T meteorologists or stock brokers.

I asked ... why do you need it... "Because it looks cool... its informational"

You need to know the wind speed in your city ... and the barometric pressure ?

Do you even know how to apply barometric pressure ?

The Nikkei average has dropped .2 points... do you even know what that means ?

So people in the west are becoming tied up in the massive computer network/matrix

The information is becoming like an opiate to the mass steadily replacing religion.

Yet we don't know what it really means.

This gate keepers of this matrix ... (FOX/CNN/BBC/AP/TIME etc) know this so they stream as much CONTENT (you know that corp-speak buzz word) as to remain INFORMATIONAL RELEVANT AND CURRENT

In otherwords... blanket the brain with doses of info...

and you know why we like being CONNECTED to this CONTENT ?

Because it makes us feel smart.

How many times you see people looking smart on their iPAD reading all manner of infotainment gloop ... legs crossed sipping Cappuccino in Starbucks ?

This "digital content" consumption is a a sickness.

It is like the info is become more relevant than the fact...

I am trying to Paraphrase Jean Baudrillard here... but the simulation has become the real.

Just the "Conflict" we see on TV and "the internets" has become hype, but is still detached info... and simulated and unreal... but we still react to the simulation with fear and idiocy because ... this information is TRULY and Inexorably presented without proper CONTEXT and today's digital consumer generation doesn't really care about historical context.

We get bored with such context.

Eyes roll over when we explain facts and histoy... cut to the chase... whats the SCOOP !

Sorry for my incoherence.

I hope it makes some sense.

[Xagzan]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

We don't even need to discuss whether one religion seems more plausible than another. It's a futile discussion, anyway. The way I see it, the beliefs espoused by the religion are not as important as how the believer perceives them.

For example, even though I am not heavily religious (haven't read all of the texts and so on), I do accept a certain group's religious beliefs. However, the way that I perceive it is that these texts and interpretations were made by man, and thus are flawed. There may be bits of God in them, but they are not the direct word of God. As I encounter events in life and as science progresses, the religious beliefs interplay with them in a dynamic manner. It doesn't even matter what the religious beliefs are, or what the religion is: there are people in this group who hold the religious texts as the ultimate truth, who have a very narrow interpretation of what they must mean, and who would rather attempt to force reality to conform to their beliefs (even if it means their suffering and/or death) than to work with reality for what it is.

I haven't even described what the particular religious beliefs may be, and it really doesn't matter. One could argue that it's a matter of piety, but I think it's more about how high your heads are in the clouds, and how willing you are to accept reality.


Speaking of Iran... I'm sure this will sound weird, but is anyone else glad to see that Iran has arguably reached the state of becoming a nuclear power? The way I see it, it was going to happen sooner or later; all of the sanctions and weapon-waving merely delayed the inevitable. Now we can all move on, and treat them with a bit more respect. Thanks to the concept of "mutually assured destruction" I'm not particularly afraid of what they might do even if they gained nuclear weapons.

Actually, why are people so terrified of nuclear weapons? Yes, their destructive potential is greater than any other weapon type, but it's not like we're talking water balloons vs. bombs. These countries still have plenty of other destructive potential even with nuclear weapons. So then, why do the politicians make such a big deal about nuclear capabilities?

Whenever I have certain relatives who start discussing Iran, and they eventually get to how fearful they are about them acquiring nuclear weapons, and how we should do something to assure that does not happen, I inevitably can't help but say, "What do you expect? With the constant and increasing beating of the drums of war against Iran by all the chickenhawks promoted in the corporate media, and the threat of suggested military action if they do develop, or try to, nukes, by a country with thousands of warheads itself and an increasing prejudice for anything middle-eastern - from that viewpoint, they'd have to be crazy not to want one.

That's not to say I'm happy about the presence of more friggin nukes in the world, but you have to at least see the other viewpoints to make sense of it all.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

i think that "Brain Melting Cuteness" is asking them to make a contract

I don't mind making a marriage contract with her.

Back on topic, I find that this is what is becoming (or rather, unbecoming) of US.



Either way, it seems that the Yanks are ****ed.

[Kokukirin]

Well, it's more complicated than that.

It's obvious that Iran cannot afford a full-scale war against US (or Israel). But at the same time Iran also knows that US and Israel are reluctant to start another regional conflict. With that in mind Iran can try to push the line (in this case, make nukes) without forcing US and Israel into a full-scale war. For Iran, the ideal scenario would be successfully making a nuke before US and Israel respond militarily. Once Iranians have nukes, they'd gain an enormous leverage against their foes in the region (that is, almost everyone not named Syria and Russia).

From Israel (and US to a lesser-degree) POV, nuclear-armed Iran is too dangerous. Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map in the past. Even though it is unlikely to be carried out, the possibility of it happening is bad enough. Even now Israel is still unsure how to respond to Iran getting closer to nukes. There are signs that sanctions are starting to bite Iran economically, and Iran may cave in to start another round of negotiation. But it is unclear if sanctions are fast and effective enough. If Israel chooses to airstrike, Hezbollah and Hamas are almost certain to retaliate, and inevitably escalates the issue. Effectiveness of airstrikes is questionable if the facilities are deeply underground as suspected.

There are just too many uncertainties in the Iran issue. We don't know how Israel will react to Iran getting closer to nukes. We don't know how close Iran is to obtaining nukes. We don't know whether sanctions and threat of war will force Iran back to the table. While no party really wants to start a war, it is entirely possible that one of them will just miscalculate and take one step too far.

[Zetsubo]

I may sound silly for this view.

Laugh if you want.

And educate me after.

I think the USA should lay off IRAN and let them have their NUKE power and or whatever else.

Then if that nation of religious numbskulls (no different from the USA religious numbskulls) ever makes the mistake of using such weapons technology on any part of the USA then simply send 1 Trident submarine and make a make IRAN pay for their hubris.

The USA can hit back harder than IRAN can ever dream of hitting and the USA needs to remember this.

I know my analogy is shaky and possibly false... but...

If a mosquito bites you in your home, smash it !

But don't go trying to hunt down the all mosquito's in another nation outside your home because you do not want one to get inside you home and bite you.

Deal with your domestic mosquitoes first and be satisfied with that.

Sure you can have preventative pest control measures... but the fact is it must be concentrated on the home grown mosquitoes and not ones that can barely reach you from across the vast oceans.

People are fearful because they do not understand the context.

Also people are fearful because they do not want to get hit first by some mad Islamic terrorist.

Yet... it is better to get hit first... because GOD HELP the man that threw the first punch.

You have more than moral justification and you are FREE to make IRAN into a red smear on the face of the planet (brutish/ignorant statement ?)

Perhaps I do not have all my facts together but currently that is how I see it... for now... as I could be wrong... so please inform.

[Kokukirin]

I don't think Iran has the ability to strike US with nukes. But Israel is certainly within its range. And for a country of Israel's size, a nuke will devastate almost the entire country. Iran, in turn, will be hit by Israel's god-knows-how-many nukes.

It is highly unlikely that Iran will actually strike Israel with nukes, but the possibility is there. I'd strongly prefer not to have another nuclear rivalry that is even worse than India-Pakistan.

The Arab countries are also highly suspicious of Iran. A nuclear-armed Iran will certainly start a regional arm race in ME. That, of course, is not a scenario that Israel and US would like to see.

IMO it would be highly irresponsible if US just let Iran do what they like without regard for its regional allies. And in the end a more uncertain future will bite back at US, in form of oil price hikes, or perhaps something worse.

[Vexx]

"nukes" ... o.O ... will more likely be delivered by 3rd world nations via Ryder or U-haul trucks... inside a shipping container... etc. So Iran certainly *could* hit anywhere in the world with a nuke, just as North Korea could -- and they could sell it to a third party terrorist group (which is the real concern).

Strategic-level nuclear weapons aren't "military weapons" at all - they are instruments of political terror and uncertainty.

[Zetsubo]

For some perspective:

It has been said that other arab nations are suspicious of IRAN:

1. Is this true
2. and Why ?
3. how does this tie into us domestic politics ?

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Vexx

"nukes" ... o.O ... will more likely be delivered by 3rd world nations via Ryder or U-haul trucks... inside a shipping container... etc. So Iran certainly *could* hit anywhere in the world with a nuke, just as North Korea could -- and they could sell it to a third party terrorist group (which is the real concern).

Strategic-level nuclear weapons aren't "military weapons" at all - they are instruments of political terror and uncertainty.

only if Iran or NK really wants to die. if a nuke explodes in the US and was determined to be of foreign origin both NK and Iran would instantly be vaporize. US wouldn't even bother to bring it up with the UN and both county knows it. And if DC was taken out some Nuke Sub commander would probably just add Pakistan and Afghanistan to the list and nuke them all.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Xagzan

Whenever I have certain relatives who start discussing Iran, and they eventually get to how fearful they are about them acquiring nuclear weapons, and how we should do something to assure that does not happen, I inevitably can't help but say, "What do you expect? With the constant and increasing beating of the drums of war against Iran by all the chickenhawks promoted in the corporate media, and the threat of suggested military action if they do develop, or try to, nukes, by a country with thousands of warheads itself and an increasing prejudice for anything middle-eastern - from that viewpoint, they'd have to be crazy not to want one.

That's not to say I'm happy about the presence of more friggin nukes in the world, but you have to at least see the other viewpoints to make sense of it all.

This.

If I was Iran, with my enemies screaming their heads off about how they want to bomb me, I would want nukes too. It's the only way to protect myself. I mean, the entire GOP minus Ron Paul has a bomb Iran platform. This means 50% of voting Americans think it is a good idea if Iranians die. And with Israel already having nukes, what else is Iran to do? Pakistan has nukes, and no matter how mad America is about them, no one is saying they should invade it. So why shouldn't Iran look forward to having the same privilege?