Jump to content
Awoo.

The General 'Murican Politics Thread


Tornado

Recommended Posts

I’m honestly curious about how else he intends for space travel/forces. And regarding the other topic of discussion, how long would it even take for a change like that. Can’t recall how often if ever it happens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind the fact the Air Force already does space operations...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NASA is primarily and deliberately a scientific and exploration civilian agency rather than a military one (that isn't to say that they don't do things of military importance or handle the heavy lifting for branches of the military who need help in that area), and things typically under the purview of the Air Force are different enough conceptually from doing things in space that they were already deliberately separated being in charge of most space missions once already.

 

 

Of the things he was talking about there, the idea to create a new a new agency to specifically handle military operations in space is by far the least stupid part of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not so much of it being the least stupid than the fact that he decided to blurt it out for the world (and competing nations like China and Russia) to know being the stupid part when he could’ve been hush hush on it—in fact, I could have swore I said this the last time this was brought up.

I didn’t know the Air Force was being separated from doing space missions tho, so thag was news to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

I didn’t know the Air Force was being separated from doing space missions tho, so thag was news to me. 

They handled most research, development and testing until NASA was formed, at which point it was mostly all pulled from the Air Force (and the parts of ARPA that still was researching space flight) and transferred to that agency. It also went out of its way in the early years (when it still had a budget and could afford to do it) to exclude many of the personnel that had been in the Air Force programs of the same aim; and Neil Armstrong had to fight his way back into it.

 

 

The Air Force does still have an arm that handles things in space, like launching surveillance satellites and tracking military incursions of other countries; but presumably (I say because Trump probably never thought that far into it anyway) the idea is to either separate it or replace it entirely with its own branch of the military rather than a save to another; where it would have its own budget and development goals and not be a slave to budget wrangling the controlling service branch needed to sacrifice to buy more F-35s or whatever. It's an idea that's been floated since Bush was president, always forgotten after the news cycle because it's dumb and something more important buries it (when Rumsfeld proposed it, it was interrupted by 9/11).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Tornado said:

They handled most research, development and testing until NASA was formed, at which point it was mostly all pulled from the Air Force (and the parts of ARPA that still was researching space flight) and transferred to that agency. It also went out of its way in the early years (when it still had a budget and could afford to do it) to exclude many of the personnel that had been in the Air Force programs of the same aim; and Neil Armstrong had to fight his way back into it.

The Air Force does still have an arm that handles things in space, like launching surveillance satellites and tracking military incursions of other countries; but presumably (I say because Trump probably never thought that far into it anyway) the idea is to either separate it or replace it entirely with its own branch of the military rather than a save to another; where it would have its own budget and development goals and not be a slave to budget wrangling the controlling service branch needed to sacrifice to buy more F-35s or whatever. It's an idea that's been floated since Bush was president, always forgotten after the news cycle because it's dumb and something more important buries it (when Rumsfeld proposed it, it was interrupted by 9/11).

So not only did Trump basically admit to wanting to make space militarized despite there being treaties against that sort of thing (probably also wants to stick his face on the spacecraft, as if we need more of his ugly mug plastered all over), but he also basically blurted it out for the whole fucking world to see, thus losing any advantage or element of surprise or whatnot that he MIGHT have had if this had been done behind closed doors.

Oy vey...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Treaty or not, this is one of the rare cases not to get on Trump’s ass over (well, except for him blurting it out loud) given that we’re practically in a second Cold War with China as the main rival.

They’ve been setting their eyes on space, and given how they’ve been operating in international relations, it’s really only a matter of time before we establish a heavier military presence there...and I for one would rather not have China ahead given what they could possibly do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

Treaty or not, this is one of the rare cases not to get on Trump’s ass over (well, except for him blurting it out loud) given that we’re practically in a second Cold War with China as the main rival.

They’ve been setting their eyes on space, and given how they’ve been operating in international relations, it’s really only a matter of time before we establish a heavier military presence there...and I for one would rather not have China ahead given what they could possibly do.

Yeah, I guess. It’s just both irksome how Trump’s garbage spewing mouth just keeps on throwing things he shouldn’t be saying out into the open and fucking things up, yet it’s also in a really fucked up way beneficial since it gives a lot more ammo against him for when he’s (hopefully) thrown out of office and imprisoned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus I just booted up Facebook and I’m seeing so many news topics going on from the last day alone, fuck. Sanders being a snowflake and hypocrite and people trying to equalize this to the gay cake stuff, people hanging footballs in trees demanding people stand during the anthem, everything still going on with ICE, more and more it being clear that trumps a wannabe dictator, Shitty cops abusing power...This is demoralizing to say the least. I mean I already don’t feel like I’m in a safe environment as is. Can for one day we just not have to look at this countries shit side? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SenEDDtor Missile said:

So not only did Trump basically admit to wanting to make space militarized despite there being treaties against that sort of thing (probably also wants to stick his face on the spacecraft, as if we need more of his ugly mug plastered all over), but he also basically blurted it out for the whole fucking world to see, thus losing any advantage or element of surprise or whatnot that he MIGHT have had if this had been done behind closed doors.

Oy vey...

There are treaties against putting nuclear launch platforms in space, be it in low earth orbit like Russia had in the 1970s, actual orbit like a satellite launch platform, or on the moon. It's also forbidden from parking any base on the moon for non-peaceful purposes. Everything else is fair game; but regardless in the 21st century parlance "space war" refers more to the ability to disable or destroy satellites used for surveillance, GPS and communication (be it from lasers or missiles or whatever) than it does the 60s and 70s idea of using it to shoot missiles at the Earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do know we use space for things of which I'm not allowed to speak on than they think. While I don't think a entire force is needed it is nice to have a safe guard up there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question, is it hypocritical to cheer and be happy about sarah sanders getting refused service while also not being on with the baker refusing service to the gay couple?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, KHCast said:

Question, is it hypocritical to cheer and be happy about sarah sanders getting refused service while also not being on with the baker refusing service to the gay couple?

Not gonna lie, but even as karmic as Sarah Sanders being refused service—like a minority that doesn’t belong, how ironic—yeah, that is pretty hypocritical.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Conquering Storm’s Servant said:

Not gonna lie, but even as karmic as Sarah Sanders being refused service—like a minority that doesn’t belong, how ironic—yeah, that is pretty hypocritical.

I guess I can see at face value why some feel it is. Though, I’d argue no, her way of thinking and spreading lies/bigotry and normalizing that kind of thinking, doesn’t belong and if she intends to continue spreading that kind of message, well consequences will follow, and seeing how she’s not being “discriminated” against for any reason outside of her character and what she’s choosing to do, which, again, is harming communities by normalizing hate, unlike other forms of discrimination against people, it’s not on the same level(hell, stores ARE typically allowed to refuse service if the reason isn’t infringing on civil protections law usually, so it’s not even legally creating some issue in that regard unlike with discrimination in regards to race or sexuality). At least that’s my own personal feelings on it. And considering conservatives  were going off on how it should be okay to discriminate against anyone for any reason and are now getting angry and going “how dare they” in response to this, I’d say there’s “hypocrisy” on all fronts on this topic if we wanna be fair

Idk I just can’t really see any reason to find this equally as horrible as discrimination against PoC, lgbt, Muslims, etc. to me it’s about as hypocritical as people supporting and defending Samantha bee using the c word against Ivanka, or Michelle Wolff slagging sanders makeup, but being angry about trump /constantly/ using derogatory speech towards women, blacks, etc who also gets support(and people also throwing that same language at those groups) from those that easily loose it when the slightest “offense” is thrown back at them. Context to each situation I feel is very much needed when people try to equalize this kind of stuff

Also what’s everyone’s thoughts on the Supreme Courts ruling on the travel ban? 

Link to topic https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jun/26/trump-supreme-court-upholds-travel-ban?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, Joe Crowley (corporate Dem who was supposed to be Pelosi's successor) got booted from his New York congressional seat in the Dem primaries by his significantly younger female latino challenger, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who has a raft of progressive/socialist policies, including abolishing ICE. Considering it's a fairly blue seat, she's basically a shoe-in for Congress.

DBfZCrbXgAA9TJH.jpg

DgqUndPW4AErkbb.jpg

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had no idea terry crews was doing this. Wow massive props to the guy

Apparently he even turned down a big gig that was requiring him to back out of doing this 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tornado said:

Huh. Justice Kennedy is retiring.

And the Don would probably love to add another lackey to the Supreme Court. This is gonna make things even more difficult for Democrats in the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SenEDDtor Missile said:

And the Don would probably love to add another lackey to the Supreme Court. This is gonna make things even more difficult for Democrats in the long term.

No doubt this will tilt the Supreme Court even more to the right for a generation. With the filibuster gone, the Democrats will be powerless to stop the next nomination from going through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/6/26/1775524/-Here-s-what-I-saw-at-the-border

As if I need any more reason to permanently despise the GOP and any who still try to support them for all of eternity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kevin said:

No doubt this will tilt the Supreme Court even more to the right for a generation. With the filibuster gone, the Democrats will be powerless to stop the next nomination from going through.

As they say, however, karma's a bitch.

Next Democratic Congress and President?

They could always pack the Court by increasing the number of seats. It would frankly be injustice for them not to if Kennedy is replaced with a far right lunatic rather than another swing vote; most Americans support Roe v. Wade (and Casey by extension) and if the Court goes against that, we need to seriously reconsider who is sitting on it. If the GOP is going to rig the system, fuck it, let's do it too. Let's toss out the filibuster on issues of court size.

The GOP can scream and whine about how unfair that shit is but they have gerrymandered out the ass and said there is no more room for politeness when they blocked Garland. I say drop that nuclear option, and drop it proudly.

I hope if nothing else, Collins and Murkowski use abortion as a litmus test for candidates. They have been consistently pro-choice Republicans in the past, and a nomination like this is where they will really shine.

On the other hand... there are a few red state Democrats who no doubt will throw their support behind Trump's pick to shore up their credentials back home.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can the midterms just get here already? I'm so sick of this. With every passing day, my stress and anxiety gets worse.

This Blue Wave better be a god damn big one...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.