Politics As Usual

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I am applying the Golden Rule, and you are applying the sort of utilitarian analysis associated with John Stuart Mill. I find this an odd conversation to be having with an avowed libertarian. Here in America, we have property rights that protect the rich from taxation, but there in Iraq it's OK to abuse prisoners if it might potentially benefit us. Hmm.

I am not a pure libertarian and, in fact, am probably a lot closer to a pure utilitarian, it's just that you and I would put different values on the scale when balancing any particular question like, for example, taxation.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
if you find yourself arguing on the side of one-joke socks like Not Me and Club, it's time to pause and reflect. Bathe in the healing light of liberalism, and let your sins be washed clean.

Uh huh. I'm the joke sock? Fancy that.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I am not a pure libertarian and, in fact, am probably a lot closer to a pure utilitarian

This is how I see myself, too. A pragmatist.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by sgtclub
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,123311,00.html

I think the story changes a little once an observer gets outside the "security bubble" (Fox's words) of Kabul:

Rise in Afghan attacks forces aid agencies to lower profile
War on foreigners poses a dilemma for international groups
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NG4V78O781.DTL

Electoral teams have come under repeated attack in the south and east, with two British U.N. contractors killed and several Afghans wounded. The teams have yet to enter many remote areas where Taliban-led militants are strongest. Karzai said he expected the violence to intensify as insurgents try to derail the vote.

The United Nations is also concerned that the warlords whose private armies control much of the country more than two years after the fall of the Taliban could cement their power through intimidation.

With a government pledge to disarm 40,000 militiamen by the end of this month far behind schedule, Karzai chose to emphasize NATO's unfulfilled promise to expand its peacekeeping mission.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...430EDT0486.DTL

edited to add link
etft -- t.s.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Now, for the interesting military stuff:

How we dismantled Sadr's militia

I suppose reveling in this sort of news is what happens when you turn foreign policy over to the Pentagon. The article says:

• Gen. Hertling said Mahdi's Army is defeated, according the Army's doctrinal definition of defeat. A few stragglers might be able to fire a rocket-propelled grenade, he said, but noted: "Do they have the capability of launching any kind of offensive operation? Absolutely not."

Meanwhile, Sadr is now the second-most popular figure in Iraq, with the approval of something like 67% of the population. He stood up to us, and walked away -- never mind the arrest warrant, or all the tanks we sent after him. So no wonder that his star is rising. He can probably stand this sort of "defeat."

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Not Me
I think that what upsets people are American soldiers being killed and maimed. It upsets me and it is effecting how I feel about the Admin's handling of Iraq.

You have to remember that large numbers of people in this country believe that Iraqi's attacked us on 9/11. They are wrong, of course, but a similar percentage of these people think that New Mexico is not part of the US. Sad, yes, but do they care what happens in Abu Gharaib? I doubt it. But OTOH, I am sure that they feel like me when you hear day after day after day about US soldiers dying and being maimed.

Given the scientific basis of your analysis, I won't dispute your conclusion.

After all, why would I argue with someone who proudly notes that her views are in concordance with people who think New Mexico is not part of the US?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
The resignation of Rummy will cause some disaffected Republicans who may otherwise stay at home to get off the couch and vote.

Slave, it's hardly shocking that Not Me missed the point but from you I'd expect more.

I cited The Economist's call for Rumsfeld to resign or be fired because she asserted that "non-scandal" had not changed anyone's mind. Clearly, it changed the minds of the editorial board of the Economist, which was singing Rummy's praises before March. Presumably those people are not unique in the world.

If the question is whether that will change votes, that's an entirely different question. The answer being, who the fuck knows.

At this point, it's too late for Rummy to resign or be fired. He has cast his lot, and the Admin has joined him, in the "we're not responsible, it was just a few errant pig-fuckers from Appalachia who were acting against orders." It would be very difficult for Rummy or the Admin to change course now.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I . . . am probably a lot closer to a pure utilitarian.

And you want to be my running mate?

Latex salesman perhaps.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
And you want to be my running mate?

Latex salesman perhaps.

Don't worry, the devils in the details. I use libertarian principles to attach values on each side of the balance. Hint: items like lower taxes always has a huge multiple attached to it.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Sadr is now the second-most popular figure in Iraq, with the approval of something like 67% of the population.

Who's 1- Jerry Lewis?

This is a part of the world where polls elsewhere had 90% of the citizens in OUR "ALLIES" hating us and thinking we did 9/11 to ourselves. That 67% like the guy who was killing us should not be surprising.

What is strange is all the polls out of Iraq lately. Here are a people who hadn't been polled much ever, suddenly getting asked all kinds of crap. I mean its been less than 2 years since 100% of the people voted for Sadaam, not you can't keep these guys quiet.

Do you think the polls are possibly accurate? Don't you think there is still a likely fear of reprisal? Remember the lady who cheered the British and was dead the next day. Its like on Fashion when people ask if you think T's funny you say of course or you could get yelled at.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Uh huh. I'm the joke sock? Fancy that.

You might have avoided whiffing if you had slightly more self-esteem.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Who's 1- Jerry Lewis?

The major Shi'ite religious leader, what's-his-name, polled at 70% in the same poll. Chalabi's approval rating needed three or four decimal places, FWIW.

If the polls say it's going poorly there, well then the polls must be broken, right? The polls that showed Sadr with much less standing a few months ago were presumably more accurate, though.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
You might have avoided whiffing if you had slightly more self-esteem.

That's funny - especially coming from someone who always feels the need to level personal attacks.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Don't worry, the devils in the details. I use libertarian principles to attach values on each side of the balance. Hint: items like lower taxes always has a huge multiple attached to it.

Alright, so you've got a modified rule utilitarianism. That might play. But be careful--complete wealth redistribution can maximize utility. Ask Mugabe. Or Greedy's man Kerry.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Alright, so you've got a modified rule utilitarianism. That might play. But be careful--complete wealth redistribution can maximize utility. Ask Mugabe. Or Greedy's man Kerry.

There you go giving utilitarianism a bad name. Don't like pushpin or something? Can't achieve Pareto optimality in your personal life?