Utopia Talk / Politics / More sebs killing more innocents

obaminated Member	Fri Nov 29 10:08:23 http://www...ice-confirm-incident-area.html But the useful idiot will argue it isn't a Muslim until it is proven to be a Muslim, then the useful idiot will argue it doesn't reflect on all Muslims despite it always being Muslims who do this. Predictable useful idiot.
jergul large member	Fri Nov 29 10:55:48 How many school shooting have your people done this year obam? I know. First you will argue they are not Trump supporters, then you will argue it does not reflect on all Trump supporters despite it always being Trump supporters who do this. Predictable useful idiot.
obaminated Member	Fri Nov 29 11:11:47 You are so fucking stupid jergul. Like literally you are fucking stupid. You dont realize how stupid you are. You aren't mentally capable of looking at american school shootings, analyzing the age of the average school shooter, then social life prior to the shooting and then drawing a logical conclusion as to the motive. You aren't mentally capable of it. And you are too dumb to realize that.
jergul large member	Fri Nov 29 11:13:33 Obam The motive is always some variation on MAGA. Your people are like that.
CrownRoyal Member	Fri Nov 29 11:19:04 By your people, you mean dimwitted Mexicans, jergul?
jergul large member	Fri Nov 29 11:25:41 CR Nah, he is identifying strongly with Trump these days. Its like he has delivered pizzas to the Oval Office and got a huge tip or something.
obaminated Member	Fri Nov 29 11:27:26 What's wrong with delivering pizzas ?
jergul large member	Fri Nov 29 11:30:07 Obam The wages and benefits mostly.
obaminated Member	Fri Nov 29 11:34:36 Have you ever delivered pizzas?
Sam Adams Member	Fri Nov 29 12:02:01 Its migrant stabbing day again. Allahu ackbaaarrrr seb!!!
Seb Member	Fri Nov 29 16:29:20 Was Thomas Mair a Muslim?
Sam Adams Member	Fri Nov 29 18:15:02 the london police admit its a muslim terrorist and sebs like "waaaaaa no its not a mudlim" Lol dumb.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Dec 01 04:29:50 At this point, the discussion about what to do with all the captuve Jihadis in Syria with citizenship in the EU should end. What should be done is that they should be judged according to Syrian law. No pleas for celemency, no attempt by RU countries to repatriate them.
Paramount Member	Sun Dec 01 07:29:41 It makes sense that if you commit a crime in country x that you should also be judged in country x. However, when it comes to war crimes and crimes against humanity etc, I think that an international tribunal could actually do a better job (more safe and fair judging on the matter). See the war in Yugoslavia/Balkan and other African conflicts where an international tribunal made it possible to command justice. In Syria the legal security could be questioned. Does Syria even have a functioning court system today? Totally innocent people could be executed. A court needs to be fair and live up to international standards. As much as we dislike IS and what they have done, we need to be better than them and not accept further injustices such as arbitrary executions.
jergul large member	Sun Dec 01 07:52:17 Nimi Assad gives Amnesties all the time.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Dec 01 08:58:29 He also regularly hangs jihadis.
jergul large member	Sun Dec 01 09:13:43 Nimi "What should be done is that they should be judged according to Syrian law. No pleas for celemency, no attempt by RU countries to repatriate them" There are rumours of extra-legal summary executions, but that is outside of Syrian law. And how does it benefit Syria to solve western security issues anyway?
jergul large member	Sun Dec 01 09:18:05 A quick google shows that most, if not almost all, EU citizens held in Syria are being detained by the kurds.
Rugian Member	Sun Dec 01 09:19:36 Back up a sec. School shootings are now the product of Trump supporters? I'm going to need to see some empirical evidence before I believe that.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Dec 01 10:01:48 A quick google later. Assad: IS members in Syrian Kurds jails to stand local trial http://apnews.com/ed1b1a1b56e9427c9487d085d204f749 "Assad made his comments in an interview with Paris Match when asked about a deal with a Kurdish-led force that would eventually bring their areas under government control. The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, who defeated IS in March with the help of the U.S.-led coalition, are holding more than 10,000 militants, mostly Syrians and Iraqis, including some 2,000 foreigners." “Every terrorist in the areas controlled by the Syrian state will be subject to Syrian law and Syrian law is clear concerning terrorism. We have courts specialized in terrorism and they will be prosecuted.” I remain very hopeful.
obaminated Member	Sun Dec 01 12:52:25 Useful idiot did exactly what I predicted.... Cause he is predictable.
Seb Member	Sun Dec 01 14:56:02 Congratulations, you successfully predicted I'd correct your error.
Pillz Member	Sun Dec 01 15:41:22 Long live the lion of Damascus
Renzo Marquez Member	Sun Dec 01 16:59:31 Can't Mossad the Assad. No matter how badly Seb's wife's sons' fathers want it done.
Forwyn Member	Sun Dec 01 18:45:55 It's really quite amazing that in today's society, with unrivaled loathing directed at politicians, that Seb so unabashedly fixates on elevating the importance of politicians' lives over that of normal citizens.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Dec 01 20:54:14 The british dude killed in this muslim terror attack was some whining self-hating SJW that campaigned in a very sebish way for pro-crime/terrorism/low-iq-migration. Aint that ironic. Some serious karma going on.
Seb Member	Mon Dec 02 00:44:38 Forwyn: It's really quite amazing that in today's society, with unrivaled loathing directed at the alt right, that Forwyn so unabashedly fixates on ignoring and exculpating far right terrorism.
Forwyn Member	Mon Dec 02 00:47:29 Yes yes. Now go shed a tear in your Jo Cox shrine. And spray some Febreze, it's been over three years
Seb Member	Mon Dec 02 01:44:08 Forwyn: Right wing terrorism doesn't exist because it's been three years since one particularly high profile murder.
Seb Member	Mon Dec 02 01:44:50 Nothing to see here. Move on please. Terrorism is only terrorism if it's done by Muslims.
Paramount Member	Mon Dec 02 06:19:47 ISIS is probably right-winged. They are very conservative. So right-wingd terrorism happens alot.
jergul large member	Mon Dec 02 06:40:23 ISIS is most definately in the social conservative camp. And also in the economic conservative camp with a clear conviction that defence is one of the few things the state should pay for.
jergul large member	Mon Dec 02 06:48:46 We could arguably say they are conservative to a fault.
Sam Adams Member	Mon Dec 02 09:39:48 "ISIS is most definately in the social conservative camp." Yet they are loved and defended by left wing radicals and sjws. Weird.
Seb Member	Mon Dec 02 11:22:24 Sam: No they aren't. Your inability to conceive of a Muslim that isn't a member of ISIS didn't mean anyone unwilling to persecute a Muslim is defending ISIS.
Forwyn Member	Mon Dec 02 13:00:51 Seb: So bring up another case, then? Instead of fixating on an old case with the perp rotting in a cage, simply because the victim in this case is a legislator, instead of a peon. You're just a leftist boomer, still whining about Lee Rigby with shitty memes about Taqiyya.
jergul large member	Mon Dec 02 13:46:21 Its been a while since we mentioned that great muslim hero Mullah Breivik.
Rugian Member	Mon Dec 02 14:02:07 John Bellingham proves that British people who spend time in Russia are not to be trusted.
Seb Member	Mon Dec 02 17:47:02 Forwyn: Why bother - the assertion was "it is always Muslims" It isn't always Muslims. Indeed, "domestic" terrorism by the far right remains the fastest growing threat in the UK, and Irish nationalists remain the biggest and most violent threat. If I mentioned the recent murder of a journalist at the hands of an Irish nationalist, the biggest problem is you wouldn't have the slightest clue what I was talking about. But all that is necessary to refute the point is a single high profile example. Obaminated, and you, know very well that it is not "always" Mulisms, what you mean is you only care about Terrorism when it is perpetrated by Muslims, so you can try and claim that all Muslims are terrorists; in a way you simply wouldn't about other groups for which there are terrorist who identify their cause with that group.
Forwyn Member	Mon Dec 02 18:25:51 "the assertion was "it is always Muslims" By who? I mocked your incessant harping about Jo Cox. In any case, I would hope that a 5% population minority would not be your largest terror threat. If that's the topic we're on now, again, I'm just curious what drives a person to support regime change wars in Islamic shitholes, turn them into "moderate" open air slave markets, and then import their refugees by the boatload.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 04:46:31 Forwyn: The OP. Do keep up Forwyn.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 04:49:16 The refugees in Europe are predominantly from Syria and Iraq after Isis - both a result of non-intervention by the West; who abandoned the region leaving a power vacuum and let Russia and Assad run riot. And of course Russia has encouraged actions to drive refugees knowing it will serve two aims shoring up his client and destabilising Europe.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Dec 03 04:50:16 >>If that's the topic we're on now, again, I'm just curious what drives a person to support regime change wars in Islamic shitholes, turn them into "moderate" open air slave markets, and then import their refugees by the boatload.<< Good intentions, which famously the road the hell is paved with. I get that, what I don't get is not learning. This isn't a lab experiment where you can afford a trial and error approach.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 05:00:42 Nim: Indeed. Failure to intervene early in yougoslavia: bunch of refugees cause political issues in Western Europe. Failure to intervene early in Kosovo: bunch of refugees in Western Europe. Instability of the bordering regions being a driver for disruption and collapse of geopolitical entities throughout history.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 05:01:14 If we shut our eyes, maybe it will all go away.
jergul large member	Tue Dec 03 05:50:20 We should probably pre-emptively intervene in the UK. Just to be safe.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Dec 03 07:00:36 Seb Perhaps one day you will learn that all countries, cultures and systems are not created equal. That the outcome of human affairs are not predictable with the same degree of certainty as the behavior of an atom is. Maybe. Iraq and Libya should have been good enough proxies for anyone to learn.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 10:42:46 Nim: The refugees from Iraq didn't start arriving until after the draw down in Abu significant numbers. If the issue is migration, the 2003 invasion doesn't tell the story you want it to.
jergul large member	Tue Dec 03 11:33:49 Mass migrations happen when civic society collapses.
jergul large member	Tue Dec 03 11:36:02 In Iraq, civic society collapsed after the provisional occupation authority ended its mandate.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Dec 03 13:41:37 Seb Massive migration does have it's problems and challenges, but they pale in comparison to the smoldering ruins and failed societies your particular brand of interventionism leaves in it's wake. For which your solution always is, "we needed to intervene harder". Incorrigible. It isn't that anyone enjoys having tyrants around, just that the solution people like you have judged by their outcome is much worse. It is impossible to remain consistent in the relationship with all the worlds tyrants, the world is much too complicated to have a zero tolerance attitude towards them. And in this complicated world it is just so very easy to come off as opportunistic and hypocritical.
Forwyn Member	Tue Dec 03 13:46:26 "both a result of non-intervention by the West; who abandoned the region leaving a power vacuum and let Russia and Assad run riot." ROFL. You fucking idiot
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 14:14:40 Nim: Is yougoslavia smouldering ruins? How about Sierra Leone? That "your particular brand" is something of a straw man Nim, as you should know from our prior conversations. And can you truly say non intervention in Syria hasn't led to amusing ruins, hundreds of thousands dead, millions displaced, and greatly boosted the far right in Europe while paying strategic dividends for Putin? By any stretch of the imagination, the fall out from Syria is far worse than Iraq.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 14:15:16 Forwyn: The kind of cogent and lucid argument we have all come to expect from you.
jergul large member	Tue Dec 03 14:26:34 Seb What non-intervention in Syria are you thinking of?
Forwyn Member	Tue Dec 03 14:39:22 Why kind of lucid argument do you think is worthy of a person who looks at the Syrian civil war, with jihadis driving around in Toyota pickups and toting BGM-71 TOW missiles, and thinks to himself, "Yeah, this was caused by non-intervention."? You're a fucking retard. That is all. You're "arguing" from a position of utter, extravagant ignorance.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 14:44:59 Jergul/Forwyn: Yeah, actually you are right - if only there hadn't been some miniscule volume arms sales by Qatar, Syria would be fine. If right at the beginning the West had vigorously and decisively intervened against Saddam in the way we did prior to the Dayton accords, then the last 8 years would look quite different.
Forwyn Member	Tue Dec 03 14:50:39 If right at the beginning the West had vigorously and decisively said, "No" to the "miniscule" material support for terrorists, indeed, we wouldn't be talking about an eight year timeline, it would have been over already.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Dec 03 14:51:34 lol.
Forwyn Member	Tue Dec 03 14:53:09 http://www...e/?report_id=2568&file_id=2574
Forwyn Member	Tue Dec 03 14:53:18 http://www...-uk-saudi-arabia-a8459731.html
jergul large member	Tue Dec 03 15:38:00 Lets not rehash this again.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 16:05:19 Forwyn, the indy article leads with an example of a spent casing stamped with a company name that wound up in 1997. The fact that ISIS has a bunch of Western built weapons is true. It doesn't follow they got them from Western govts. Even before you get to gulf states passing on weapons bought from the West (and if arms sales count as intervention then Russia and China must be the biggest interventionist powers in the world), you have weapons seized from Iraqi govt forces and you've got a huge market in resellers etc. The simple fact is the West did not intervene in any meaningful way in Syria until after Islamic state became prevalent; which it would not have done if the West had intervened decisively earlier on. Assad would not have released Islamist prisoners, nor would the army defectors that formed the bulk of the initial resistance to Assad been squeezed out by Islamists, and if we had not pulled out of Iraq prematurely, those Islamists would not have had the opportunity to operate both sides of the border. ISIS is a result of a failure to intervene.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 16:07:37 From your report Forwyn: "AROUND 90 PER CENT OF WEAPONS AND AMMUNITION DEPLOYED BY ISLAMIC STATE FORCES ARE WARSAW PACT CALIBRES—ORIGINATING PRIMARILY IN CHINA, RUSSIA, AND EASTERN EUROPEAN PRODUCER STATES." (Caps in source). In what possible world then can you say Western "intervention", in the form of ISIS obtaining Western built kit, was decisive?
jergul large member	Tue Dec 03 16:28:07 Seb Turkey, the gulf principalities, and Saudi Arabia were the principle interventionists that among other things assured that most of Aleppo province fell to the rebels. The West was highly complicit in fuelling the rebellion and supplied billions of dollars to various rebel fractions until it became clear that every rebel was a fundamental Islamist. Chaos in Iraq was not helpful. The border between Syria and Iran is not one that seperates ethnic nationalities (as is usually the case when colonial powers decide to draw lines on maps). Weapons and chaotic spillover had little difficulty spilling into Syria.
Seb Member	Tue Dec 03 16:39:52 jergul: Ah, the Russian narrative again - "all rebels are and were fundamentalists" - yet there are so many reports from humanitarian agencies that had people on the ground. The end state - the elimination of all non fundamentalist rebels - was carefully engineered. Assad should have had civil war removed as a policy option immediately. That is the lesson here.
jergul large member	Tue Dec 03 17:08:28 Seb Ah, the CT nutter theory that Assad's death squads swept through Idlib killing all the secular rebels, but leaving the Islamists alone. Secular rebels trying to operate in a cesspool of Islamists had very few options: 1. Get gunned down by Islamists 2. Leave Syria 3. Fight under Kurdish command 4. Accept amnesty. So of course whatever secular rebels there were at one point became none fast - and by 2015 at the latest.
jergul large member	Tue Dec 03 17:17:11 Civil war is never a policy option. The State supresses civic unrest using various means including talks and negotation. At some point civic unrest becomes so widespread that it shifts into what we call a civil war. The regime does have a lot of support. Constitutional negotiations keep on stumbling on the block that is the certainty that Assad would win any free presidential election.
Forwyn Member	Tue Dec 03 19:25:11 "In what possible world then can you say Western "intervention", in the form of ISIS obtaining Western built kit, was decisive?" It is known that most militants carry cheap, reliable Soviet small-arms like the AK or RPK. That doesn't preclude the West and its allies from being involved. ...or are you suggesting Western intelligence wouldn't have access to Warsaw Pact weaponry, which is widely available all over the world? In any case, RPKs and RPG-7s aren't what jihadis have been busting T-72s with. "Assad should have had civil war removed as a policy option immediately."
Forwyn Member	Tue Dec 03 19:26:01 ^lol. Just let foreign-trained and armed jihadis roll over your largest northern cities, let snipers shut down your freeways, choking your capital
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Dec 04 05:31:33 Seb "Is yougoslavia smouldering ruins? How about Sierra Leone?" Now that you understand what I am talking about read this again in context. "Perhaps one day you will learn that all countries, cultures and systems are not created equal. That the outcome of human affairs are not predictable with the same degree of certainty as the behavior of an atom is."
Seb Member	Wed Dec 04 10:47:26 Nim: So your arguement is you can only know if intervention will be effective in hindsight because it's not as predictable as an atom. So why is inaction preferably to action?
obaminated Member	Wed Dec 04 11:28:48 The funny bit is that seb has still been doing exactly what I said he would do at the start of this thread. He is a predictable useful idiot.
jergul large member	Wed Dec 04 13:12:39 "So why is inaction preferably to action? " Because of Sovereign integrity? Much as I would like to intervene to assure Scottish freedom in the face of English oppression.
Seb Member	Wed Dec 04 13:13:46 Also if you are going to try and argue that a background in physics leads to an inflexibly deterministic view on political issues; perhaps an atom, governed by quantum mechanics and inherently unpredictable forcing one to make predictions purely in terms of possible expectation values and where the outcome can never be certain is not perhaps the killer analogy you think it might be.
Seb Member	Wed Dec 04 13:18:35 Though of course, its not quite as bad an argument as Obaminated crowing that he has correctly predicted I'll point out the demonstrable errors in his own post: namely no, it's not always Muslims, and even if it were it would not reflect on all Muslims, especially given the proportion of Muslims that are terrorists is miniscule. For the record I predict Obaminated was about to reach for the flawed Pugh study that asks an ambiguous question and extrapolate it to mean x% of Muslims in the West are prepared to take terrorist action under the present circumstances; but there is a reasonable chance he will now not do so having been pre-warned of the stupidity of doing so.
Seb Member	Wed Dec 04 13:19:47 Jergul: If the UK government starts using machine guns against crowds of Scottish protestors; I'll be first in line calling for foreign intervention.
Forwyn Member	Wed Dec 04 13:27:25 Not when it's in response to a civil building burned down and seven cops dead, you won't. You'll be whining about muh far right IRA instigators.
jergul large member	Wed Dec 04 14:36:26 http://www...ns-report-190204165945170.html Thats right! I do remember on you calling for Iranian intervention in Basra to protect civilians from UK government forces.
Seb Member	Wed Dec 04 16:40:40 jergul: The fact we have prosecuted soldiers for doing this makes it highly doubtful the report is accurate in the soldiers being "allowed" to do this. Forwyn: IRA in Scotland? You might want to check a map. We just held a referendum on Scottish independence - the idea that the Scots are living under a regime where they have no resort to democratic processes is thin. But even under those circumstance if a mob did kill seven police and burn down a building, I guarantee the response will not be to use machine guns on crowds of protesters as Assad did. I mean we are still in a position where we are prosecuting British soldiers who shot into crowds in Northern Ireland under circumstances worse than the ones you describe.
jergul large member	Wed Dec 04 16:54:00 You seem to accept that Blair can shoot civilians in Iraq, or Thatcher could shoot them in NI without clamouring for armed intervention. Your principles seem to lack in consistency. Not so much what is done, as it is who is doing it.
jergul large member	Wed Dec 04 16:58:35 This is what you are referring to? "Syrian security forces and helicopters sprayed automatic weapons fire into a crowd of thousands of protesters demonstrating Friday after prayers in the northern town of Maaret al-Nouman, witnesses said. At least four men were killed, activist Fadi Moustafa Sufi said. An activist who has provided CNN with reliable information in the past said the crowd numbered in the tens of thousands when security forces on the streets and an attack helicopter aloft opened fire. Some demonstrators used their personal weapons, including hunting rifles and AK-47s, to detain a number of members of the security forces when they ran out of ammunition, said the activist, who did not want to be named due to the sensitivity of the situation. He did not say that demonstrators exchanged fire with the security forces."
Seb Member	Wed Dec 04 17:10:30 Jergul: Blair and Thatcher didn't shoot civilians. Where civilians were shot, it was explicitly against rules of engagement, and soldiers that did intentionally do so were prosecuted as criminals. Asking us to believe that Assad sent armoured vehicles to break protestors barricades in 2011 at Hama etc, and where there are plenty of videos of heavy calibre machine guns etc being used on unarmed civilians, that this was equivalent to e.g. bloody sunday, where paras with rifle shot (against rules of engagement) civilians? This stretches credibility, but sure, let me know when Assad has prosecuted his commanders for what must have surely been a terrible and unintended miscommunication on his part and blatant, reckless crime on theirs.
Seb Member	Wed Dec 04 17:12:50 I tell a lie. Assad did have soldiers punished with regards to killing civilians. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/12/syrian-soldiers-shot-protest He had those that refused executed.
Seb Member	Wed Dec 04 17:14:13 "how can we possibly tell these two situations apart, they are completely morally equivalent" Give me a break.
Forwyn Member	Wed Dec 04 18:09:43 "IRA in Scotland? You might want to check a map." Oh, I missed the part where you only referred to the IRA in Ireland and NI. "Indeed, "domestic" terrorism by the far right remains the fastest growing threat in the UK, and Irish nationalists remain the biggest and most violent threat." "I guarantee the response will not be to use machine guns on crowds of protesters as Assad did." You have a source to back the claim that they fired wantonly into the crowd with say, a NSV, killing people running away and rendering aid, and still miraculously causing less casualties than your paras? "under circumstances worse than the ones you describe." How many paras died on Jan 30? http://www.../News.aspx/143026#.VdOFupexlmE
jergul large member	Thu Dec 05 00:56:17 Seb You are citing what obviously was a running battle between security forces and rebels. Security forces suffered the heavier losses. But I like this new principle of attributing killings personally to people in power. How many people has Johnson murdered since he came to power after an internal coup?
jergul large member	Thu Dec 05 01:22:04 Well, will you look there. Trump just killed two people in Pearl Harbour.
smart dude Member	Thu Dec 05 03:15:52 I wonder why Seb sympathizes with terrorists.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Dec 05 05:26:04 Seb "So your arguement is you can only know if intervention will be effective in hindsight because it's not as predictable as an atom." Is it really _my_ argument that the effects of something can only be assessed after administration? Strange thing to say. The salient point was that your trial and error approach to nation building and regime change has an immense human cost and leaves entire countries in smoldering ruins. "So why is inaction preferably to action?" Ask a doctor why they do not cut open everyone that comes in with stomach pains looking for a tumor. Because when people try to solve things they do not understand, then often end up making things worse. Why the inaction on Bahrain? Why the inaction on Afghanistan Before 9/11? NK? This hypocritical and opportunistic stance on "humanistic interventions" is not a small detail in the counter narrative, which is lost 9 out of 10 times. You are not the good guys.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Dec 05 05:38:05 >>Also if you are going to try and argue that a background in physics leads to an inflexibly deterministic view on political issues; perhaps an atom, governed by quantum mechanics and inherently unpredictable forcing one to make predictions purely in terms of possible expectation values and where the outcome can never be certain is not perhaps the killer analogy you think it might be.<< Absolutly not, there are plenty of people with background in physics that do not suffer from this shortcoming. Classical physics works perfectly without quantum physics (which is all I need for the comparison). Notwithstanding the fact that quantum physical models are universally applicable and the predictions that are made orders of magnitude more robust and certain than anything out of pol sci or other quantitative social sciences.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 06:13:23 Classical physics cannot describe atoms though. That's how we discovered QM. What I find utterly fascinating is that while you are suggesting that I'm being overly deterministic, you are implicitly assuming you need absolute certainty rather than risk based decisions and managed ambiguity in effective governance. Which is precisely the attitude you'd accuse me of. Which also happens to be the kind of obsession with precision and accuracy before making a change you might find in someone with a background in, oh, quality control and six sigma. I am relaxed about making decisions in ambiguous situations. I don't suggest that we can be 100% sure of the outcome of an intervention; but on the preponderance of evidence simply from a pragmatic view I think Blair got it right in his Chicago speech (n.b. Iraq would not fit the criteria he outlined). Note nation building is not what I'm suggesting in Syria so I'm surprised you are raising it given your oft claimed ability to know me so well.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 06:22:29 Forwyn: You responded to my point to Jergul about whether intervention was needed to secure Scotland's independence. Referring to a reference to the IRA earlier in the thread doesn't really make much sense in context. "You have a source to back the claim that they fired wantonly into the crowd with say, a NSV" Yes. Google Hama, 2011 The question is not how many paras died that day, its how many soldiers and police officers had died to that date. Jergul: Like I said, give me a break. Johnson committed a coup did he?
jergul large member	Thu Dec 05 06:58:54 Would you prefer put into power by hard core party loyalists?
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 07:14:19 Jergul: How about: peaceful transition under normal constitutional arrangements. Utter fucking Charlaton he may be, the closest thing he came to a coup was the prorogation - which he had the flimsiest of excuses too say was arguably complient with lethal obligations at the time - but it was slapped down by the court and he obeyed. Would that Assad were only as bad as Boris. But should the army ever start barrel bombing markets in labour held towns, I'll be there asking for an intervention force from countries with a tradition of democracy. So not friend Putin.
jergul large member	Thu Dec 05 07:57:12 Seb We do not really know how many people Johnson and his hard core party loyalist supporters massacred to install their regime. Your guess is as good as mine. Could you provide me with a link to the Constitution you are referring to? Regime hardliners often refer to it, but I have never found a copy of it online.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Dec 05 08:00:00 >>Classical physics cannot describe atoms though. That's how we discovered QM.<< >>you are implicitly assuming you need absolute certainty rather than risk based decisions and managed ambiguity in effective governance.<< Moving goal posts and strawman and missing the point. You can take whatever risks you wish if your own ass is on the line. Your ass isn't on the line when you are advocating trial and error regime problem solving with other peoples countries and millions of lives. What you are doing is very much like when Rugian and Obaminated are cheering on Brexit and "muh freedom", but by a factor 100. Lets see Rugian advocate for Mass. to make a HARD exit out of the Union. They have nothing to lose if and when brexit becomes a disaster, likewise you have nothing to lose when these countries are on fire. Ops *shrugs* I guess next time we should invade sooner? Later? Meh, we will figure it out eventually from the safety of my summer house in France. This has nothing to do with ambiguity, that is something we have to deal with every day. It is easy to be relaxed about ambiguity when none of the outcome affects you either way, someone else is walking away with the tab. Better judgment tells me I should not take your relaxed posture as a sign of psychopathy. Your mechanical thinking and extrapolation from narrow evidence together with the relaxed stance towards the results is something that is frequent with you yes, repeatedly you apply this to the entire world.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 08:05:16 www.legislation.gov.uk; https://erskinemay.parliament.uk
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Dec 05 08:05:57 >>Classical physics cannot describe atoms though. That's how we discovered QM.<< So your position is that we can not with extremely high degree of certainty predict the behavior of atoms, because something something quantum mechanics? Probably not the hill you of all people want to die on. It is ultimately irrelevant, because you understand the point, certain things in this World are easy to predict, they behave the same in the UK, India and in China, like atoms. Whatever uncertainty there is applies universally, the same is not true with people, cultures, human sytems and countries.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 08:09:32 Nimatzo: "Moving goal posts and strawman and missing the point" Not at all. This is the crux. The argument you are making is that I'm assuming a false degree of certainty about the outcome. Every policy decision is to some degree trial and error, and asking for absolute certainty that there will be a net public good (not that such a thing could ever be agreed, in the way that a KPI for some manufacturing process could be) is a criteria that leads to inaction. And inaction is as much a choice with negative consequences as the choice of action. All policy decisions are made on the balance of risk, there is no other way.
	show deleted posts