Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Horse Named Stranger

US Politics: CPAC - Finding new ways to bring America to Rune.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

I was trying to get this as I grew up about 80 miles from 8 mile. 

It's a coy reference to Eminem being more witty with his rhymes than us?

 

2 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Nah man, just a stupid joke about how CPAC rhymes with Tupac (and I thought Eminem was making some point about the members of Free World ending up like Tupac, which is why he cocked finger guns at them....)

Since we are having this meta-discussion.

In the movie the rhyme was IIRC:

one pack two pack three pack four, he's pack, she's pack, Tupac none.

Making the point, that his opponent in this rap battle, is no Tupac.

Does that work with CPAC, I mean they are obviously no Tupac. They wouldn't make it in a freestyle rap battle, they wouldn't make it in the whitest cultural appropriated version (even whiter than Eminem and 8 Mile) of a rap battle, a poetry slam [yes this was a rather convoluted set up for that punch line]. So I fail to see the superiority of a thread title invoking Eminem.

While I am rather fond of my title playing with rune and ruin. And, yes, as a pun, it's even white enough for CPAC standards.

Edited by A Horse Named Stranger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DMC said:

 Will he look like a weak idiot that almost ensures the Dems lose the White House in four years?  That's pretty damn likely too.

Hmm. I don't know. I don't think Foreign policy is high at all on the minds of people when they go out to vote. Biden might lose the presidency for any number of things, but I think it's a bit of a reach to say it will ensure that Dems lose the WH because of actions he does or does not take against Iran, especially this far out from an election. As per Pew, the economy, healthcare, supreme court appointments, covid and violent crime all ranked ahead of foreign policy as the 'top issues' for registered voters during the 2020 election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Raja said:

I don't think Foreign policy is high at all on the minds of people when they go out to vote.

If his dealings with Iran became such a boondoggle they will be.  Ask Carter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Iran is a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Trump's unilateral action has made it very difficult to achieve anything without something pretty drastic being done. Iran sees the US as a bad faith actor, and they are not wrong in that assessment. it also doesn't give a crap about any suffering of its people as a result of sanctions so long as those in power and the military are doing OK. Why would Iran come to the table with Biden, even if they thought Biden would negotiate in good faith and abide by any agreement? Given the attitudes and ideologies that put Trump in the White House are still significantly present in US politics it's possible that in 4, and likely that in 8, years someone will be in the White House who will just tear up any agreement established with Biden. So what is the point from Iran's perspective?

If you want to actually achieve anything with Iran there has to be unified bipartisan agreement in the USA first. Iran has to have a reason to want to talk and want to honour any agreement. That doesn't exist right now. Sanctions won't do it, and absent the USA being a long term reliable party to an agreement the only other solution is violent overthrow of the current Iranian regime.

So, other than the actual Trumpkinites, what is the rhetoric coming from the less bat shit right looking like?

 

Edited by The Anti-Targ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, DMC said:

If his dealings with Iran became such a boondoggle they will be.  Ask Carter.

It can depend on a few things, if it gets super drawn out then sure, but we're so far away from the election that I don't think it reaches to the extent that it 'almost ensures' Dems lose the white house. If twas closer to the election, I'd be more inclined to agree.

We'll see how it plays out.

Edited by Raja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Nah man, just a stupid joke about how CPAC rhymes with Tupac (and I thought Eminem was making some point about the members of Free World ending up like Tupac, which is why he cocked finger guns at them....)

Whoa, whoa, whoa ... Tupac does not rhyme with CPAC. "Too-pahk" vs "C-Pack". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

I tend to agree with this, personally. Diplomacy is the way to go, especially when you hold all the cards.

That being said, you're talking about an antagonist nation that

1)I'm sure a clear majority of Americans couldn't find on a map. 

B ) Would rather see bombed into nothingness than allowed any kind of 'victory', moral or otherwise (take a moment and remember that your fellow citizens didn't even MENTION the two different expeditionary wars in administratively crippled nation states we are currently engaged in during the last election before you think otherwise) 

III) Don't look like 'us'. (See item B )

Four) "They're a threat to our way of life!"

Dawg. The reasons for the Biden administration to NOT be overly lenient have nothing to do with right, wrong, or morality and everything to do with the imbecilic average American voter. 

I think that the point about the half of the country would see any "victory" for Iran as bad is kind of the point of everything though. American politics is team sports, most people are going to cheer or boo based on the color jersey the president/congress is wearing. Just look at how liberals condemned Trump's air strikes then were applauding the air strikes we did in Syria just the other day. Americans have very little understanding of foreign policy and will just kind of go along with whatever the blue or red team tells them is good. Obviously there are some things that Americans are conditioned to react poorly to, but just look at the Iran nuclear deal, it was popular among democrats.

Biden/the Dems will not lose in 2024 based on their foreign policy. I saw DMC cite the Iran Hostage Crisis but that was a completely different situation where Iran was actively holding high profile prisoners, that is not going to happen because of a softer approach towards Iran.

15 minutes ago, Week said:

Whoa, whoa, whoa ... Tupac does not rhyme with CPAC. "Too-pahk" vs "C-Pack". 

It does if you speak in a thick Limerick accent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

Biden/the Dems will not lose in 2024 based on their foreign policy. I saw DMC cite the Iran Hostage Crisis but that was a completely different situation where Iran was actively holding high profile prisoners, that is not going to happen because of a softer approach towards Iran.

Carter didn't lose because Iran took hostages, he lost because Operation Eagle Claw was a failed and aborted mission that made him look weak and incompetent.  Which is just how Biden would look if he lifted sanctions only to have to reimpose them again because Tehran didn't budge.

Edited by DMC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DMC said:

Carter didn't lose because Iran took hostages, he lost because Operation Eagle Claw was a failed and aborted mission that made him look weak and incompetent.  Which is just how Biden would look if he lifted sanctions only to have to reimpose them again because Tehran didn't budge.

That's bullshit. Republicans are going to scream about it if Biden cuts a deal with Iran or not, and Democrats are going to applaud if he prevails, or he will get a "good try you'll get 'em next time champ" if he fails. There is a difference between a failed military operation, where Americans died and a diplomatic move to remove then end up having to reapply sanctions. Shit he could even say that he tried to offer Iran an olive branch then slapped them with even stronger sanctions than Trump if they don't come to the table.

Biden is going to get hit one way or another, might as well make a real go of it instead of half assing it and still losing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

or he will get a "good try you'll get 'em next time champ" if he fails. There is a difference between a failed military operation, where Americans died and a diplomatic move to remove then end up having to reapply sanctions. Shit he could even say that he tried to offer Iran an olive branch then slapped them with even stronger sanctions than Trump if they don't come to the table.

Biden is going to get hit one way or another, might as well make a real go of it instead of half assing it and still losing.

Your fantasy land is quite magical indeed.

And, for the last time, Biden IS making a go of it.  If Tehran is putting preconditions on simply joining informal talks, they are the ones holding up diplomacy, not the Biden administration.

You can whine and cry about what the Trump regime did to them, or how they are the injured party, or how it's not rational to trust us anymore.  All of this is true.  But by the same token, it ain't rational for Biden to make concessions when all of their posturing right now says they do not want to deal.  The village idiot comes to this conclusion quicker.

Edited by DMC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DMC said:

This line of thinking just seems entirely ignorant of the political reality.  Let's say Biden lifted the sanctions solely for informal talks.  And then those talks lead to nothing - which considering Tehran's posture right now is a very high likelihood.  Could Biden then reimpose the sanctions?  Sure.  Will he look like a weak idiot that almost ensures the Dems lose the White House in four years?  That's pretty damn likely too.

Of course it is!  Will it ever not be a 'political reality' that we have to create wars and topple governments?  If that's what you're falling back on there's no end to imperialism and we just accept all the bullshit that's happened and never try to change it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Of course it is!  Will it ever not be a 'political reality' that we have to create wars and topple governments?  If that's what you're falling back on there's no end to imperialism and we just accept all the bullshit that's happened and never try to change it.

Uh...what?  The fuck does not agreeing to lift sanctions in exchange for simply talking to Iran have to do with creating wars or toppling governments?  Regardless of what happens between Iran and the US during the Biden administration, nobody is suggesting we topple any governments, and the only wars that are created are the proxy ones between Iran and the Saudis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Uh...what?  The fuck does not agreeing to lift sanctions in exchange for simply talking to Iran have to do with creating wars or toppling governments?  Regardless of what happens between Iran and the US during the Biden administration, nobody is suggesting we topple any governments, and the only wars that are created are the proxy ones between Iran and the Saudis.

That's more a broader comment on US foreign policy in general, but the history of our intervention with Iran too. 

edit:  my point being that we keep doing the same shit expecting different results 

Edited by larrytheimp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

the history of our intervention with Iran too. 

edit:  my point being that we keep doing the same shit expecting different results 

In that respect, you could say the same thing about Iran.  It's not like Khamenei doesn't know Biden was the VP of the guy that spent most of his tenure putting together the deal in the first place (same goes with Rouhani for that matter).  And it's not like he doesn't know the Biden administration is significantly different than the one that reneged on that deal (not to mention is essentially a continuation of the one he made the deal with).  He could, ya know, not be a dick about coming back to the table if he wanted to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, DMC said:

In that respect, you could say the same thing about Iran.  It's not like Khamenei doesn't know Biden was the VP of the guy that spent most of his tenure putting together the deal in the first place (same goes with Rouhani for that matter).  And it's not like he doesn't know the Biden administration is significantly different than the one that reneged on that deal (not to mention is essentially a continuation of the one he made the deal with).  He could, ya know, not be a dick about coming back to the table if he wanted to.

Sure he could, but why bother, when he knows that regardless what he agrees to, it can / will be torn up and discarded like last time, and all he has to show for it is a bunch of new sanctions?  

I get why this is what the Biden administration is doing, and I didn't expect anything different.  I just think it's doing absoultely nothing good for the world.  Iran's no fucking angel but the US has literally created this problem.  Didn't expect we'd stop fucking dog, but i'm still gonna hope for it.

eta: and if the US dems dont' have some answer to the fact that any treaty or agreement they make is worth shit because of our internal politics, maybe there is no point trying to negotiate anway.  but fucking hell, let's not pretend that this isn't a complete own goal here.

Edited by larrytheimp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, larrytheimp said:

Sure he could, but why bother, when he knows that regardless what he agrees to, it can / will be torn up and discarded like last time, and all he has to show for it is a bunch of new sanctions?  

I mean, yeah, I'm not arguing that.  From the Iranian perspective I don't think there's much point to deal regardless.  My argument has simply been there's not much else Biden can do about it, and blaming the impasse on him/his administration is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, DMC said:

I mean, yeah, I'm not arguing that.  From the Iranian perspective I don't think there's much point to deal regardless.  My argument has simply been there's not much else Biden can do about it, and blaming the impasse on him/his administration is ridiculous.

Gotcha.  Part of my comments here have also been a reaction to the fact that in our country, our elected officials seem to be accountable to the MIC and corporate interests, instead of the other way around.  There was some stuff earlier about "if we stop selling bombs to the Saudis, how will the bomb painters feed their families?" .  Half of my extended family works in either the insurance industry or the "defense" industry, iin one capacity or another, so I'm not a stranger to this line of thinking.  I just think it's totally fucked.

Edited by larrytheimp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His first foreign policy failure is Haiti.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DMC said:

In that respect, you could say the same thing about Iran.  It's not like Khamenei doesn't know Biden was the VP of the guy that spent most of his tenure putting together the deal in the first place (same goes with Rouhani for that matter).  And it's not like he doesn't know the Biden administration is significantly different than the one that reneged on that deal (not to mention is essentially a continuation of the one he made the deal with).  He could, ya know, not be a dick about coming back to the table if he wanted to.

It’s my understanding that it was Biden who did a lot of the dealing on the Iran deal in the first place. He knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...