April 14, 2018

At the Checkerdot Café...

fullsizeoutput_32f

... you can talk all day.

93 comments:

rehajm said...

Less Give A Damn. More Fuck It.

traditionalguy said...

Eat Mor Chikin. It scares the NYC liberals.

Chuck said...

In light of the Trump Administration's declarations about Syria's use of chemical weapons (joined by the U.S. military, U.S. intelligence, UK intelligence, French intelligence), I want to use this space to again grind on Scott Adams' pronouncement that the stories of that chemical weapons attack were a "hoax."

And, it is the second time that Adams has published an allegation that Syrian chemical weapons attacks were a hoax. Searching the online quotes of Adams in this regard is confusing, insofar as Adams was doing the same in April of 2017, in response to the first major Syrian gas attack during the Trump Administration.

I'm enjoying a big mug of delicious coffee as I ponder the question: What is more noxious; chlorine gas, or a Scott Adams periscope?

Tommy Duncan said...

Tough day in SE Minnesota for the opening of the trout season. Currently 29 degrees with a fresh inch of sleet/frozen rain on the ground. I wonder which bugs are hatching today?

The bad news is the weather is predicted to go downhill from here.

AllenS said...

Meanwhile, 40 miles NE of the Twin Cities, last night we received about a quarter to half an inch of snow, which was considerably less than the 5 to 8 inches predicted. Very windy last night. Snowing now and eight to 12 inches have been predicted. Light wind and 25º.

AllenS said...

Yuge gust of wind just now.

rehajm said...

Sometimes you can trick em in the afternoon with little midges and stonefly nymphs and emergers, the stuff you'd see if it was warmer. When that doesn't work break out the Steelhead stuff- little feathery streamers or the mop fly if you're not a hater...

victoria said...

Too Cool

Vicki from Pasadena

Tcdq1293 said...

When was the last time a woman commented here?

EDH said...

chickelit said...
The drugs turned her into jello pudding.

Ann Althouse said...
So you think rape is funny, chickelit? I can't imagine what sort of mind thinks like that. Sad.


I took chickelit's humor differently: mocking the accused rapist and the way the media in fact installed Cosby as "America's Dad" while bestowing riches upon him for, among other things, hocking instant personal gratification in a cup to children disguised as "wholesomeness".

"Maybe she (mom) forgot?" ...since "last night".

On cue, Cosby acts surprised a woman couldn't remember the night before.

Curious George said...

Just rain and windy here in Milwaukee on Milwaukee Day. Going to have a few Milwaukee Day Lagers, and maybe a cigar.

rhhardin said...

There's a 24 hour ham North Dakota contest starting at 2pm EDST. Maybe I can get that elusive last state that I never hear anybody from.

Some state contests never take off though.

Ralph L said...

High of 80 degrees 3 days in a row here in central NC. Should probably mow before tomorrow's thunderstorm but first need to do my dad's taxes.

Gahrie said...

OH shit...now we're going to face years of gratuitous attacks on Scott Adams on every post.

the 4chan Guy who reads Althouse said...

Yesterday Althouse had the headline "“His robe opened... He smelled like cigar and espresso and his body odor.” And that sounded kinda cool, a dude in his robe, smoking cigars and drinking espressos, it seems kinda laid back in a Fifties Dude way. I mean, the dude has body odor, which isn't usually good, but that's probably because he's still in his robe, he hasn't splashed on the Old Spice yet.

I remember my grandfather had a cologne on his dresser back in the day, it was Jovan Musk. I didn't know what musk was back then, but then I don't think I know exactly what musk is now, really, I just know it smelled like my grandfather.

Back then my grandfather also wore a cool red Members Only jacket, it fucking rocked. I mean, he was my grandfather, so he was old, but when we'd all go out to Black Angus for dinner he looked like a player. Like, he'd flirt with the waitresses and shit, but that was OK because my grandmother was dead at the time.

It's funny how a smell can bring back a memory like it's right there in front of you. I remember when I was maybe twelve my older sister would hang out with her high-school girlfriends at the pool. I had a crush on one of them, but it was pretty innocent, this was back before chicks took pictures of themselves chicks spreading their ass cheeks and showing their assholes.

Anyway, she smelled like Hawaiian Tropic suntan lotion, which chicks used back before they were all worried about skin cancer and shit. Today, you don't really smell Hawaiian Tropic unless you're up close to a stripper.

I also remember my sister's friend wore a lot of lip gloss, but I don't really know what that smelled like, I was never close enough to her lips to smell them. Probably like cherry or strawberry would be my guess. But I remember thinking that lip gloss was hot, maybe because that was around the time I first knew what blow-jobs were, so a chick's lips were a lot hotter than they used to be.

So back then I thought it would, like, be really cool to be wearing a red Members Only jacket and getting a blow-job from a chick in a bikini wearing strawberry lip gloss and smelling all like Hawaiian Tropic. Actually, I still think that would be cool, really.

I post my shit here.

rhhardin said...

So you think rape is funny, chickelit? I can't imagine what sort of mind thinks like that. Sad.

The best rape jokes are funny and offend knee-jerkers.

rhhardin said...

There are ethnic problems with rape jokes. Duterte for example has told a lot of them but they make no sense in Western culture.

rhhardin said...

Trump is making a nuclear deal with North Korea involving an exchange of women.

Humperdink said...

Best time of the year to be a hockey fan. My team, the Pittsburgh Penguins are playing their cross-state rival the Philadelphia Flyers. Series is tied at 1-1.

The Pens have won 2 straight Stanley Cups, with Sidney Crosby as captain. Crosby has been mocked and ridiculed by Philly fans since he entered the league (nicknamed Cindy, Crybaby). Just for the record ..... Pittsburgh has Crosby, Philadelphia has Cosby. Watching hockey highlights and reading court testimony, apparently they both score a lot.

madAsHell said...

I don't understand how Andrew McCabe happened, and how did the Clinton campaign know how to find him??

SayAahh said...

"you can talk all day"
But how can this comment section function w/o the obnoxious Inga/Chuck vs. everybody Tag team.
I am old enough to remember this blog before the relentless banal ego driven tirades.
Sad...and boring.

Robert Cook said...

"In light of the Trump Administration's declarations about Syria's use of chemical weapons (joined by the U.S. military, U.S. intelligence, UK intelligence, French intelligence), I want to use this space to again grind on Scott Adams' pronouncement that the stories of that chemical weapons attack were a 'hoax.'"

I don't know if the gas attack in Syria was real or fake, or, if real, who perpetrated the attack. However, you surely can't accept the "declarations" of discredited and/or unreliable interested entities as the U.S. Military, U.S. Intelligence, UK Intelligence, and French as proof they happened, or, if they happened, as proof that Assad was the perpetrator. I'm inclined to accept that an attack seems to have happened, less so that the Assad regime is guilty, (though it--and he--may be). As has been pointed out this week and after the previous attacks, Assad has nothing to gain from deploying poison gas, and much to lose. On the other hand, parties who want to draw the U.S. in to help overthrow Assad have much to gain from faking or actually perpetrating such attacks.

langford peel said...

Hey I just put on my Members Only Jacket and my Jordache jeans to go to the Outback for a Bloomin' Onion.

I wear Clubman though. The chicks dig it.

Bay Area Guy said...

My hero - Andy McCarthy - says the Michael Cohen raid by NY Feds is likely legit and potential peril for Trump. .

AG Sessions needs to get on top of it.

Michael K said...

However, you surely can't accept the "declarations" of discredited and/or unreliable interested entities as the U.S. Military, U.S. Intelligence, UK Intelligence, and French as proof they happened

Just when Cookie has had a series of intelligent comments back comes the beast in the forest,.

Bay Area Guy said...

I'm a little skeptical of the Syria bombing. True, we get in trouble when we "pick sides" but we also get in trouble when we "play referee".

Assad is scum, and he's fighting ISIS, who is scum too.

Is there any organized non-scum in Syria to fight back against Assad? Not sure. I'd need to bone up on the issue.

The lessons from Iraq, I think, are "don't intervene in Middle East countries with the delusional belief that you can turn them into democracies"

During the Cold War, I was a warmonger because I believed (and still do) that the Soviets posed a global threat to the West.

Post-Cold War, I've slowly become much less of an interventionist, because it's easy to make things worse.

As for Syria, I liked the "idea" of leaving, but now I don't know.

William said...

The second part of the Russian series, Catherine The Great is now on Amazon Prime. It's worth seeing. The title actress was great in the first series, but she seems too young for the years she's now playing. She looks younger than her teen age son. The drama between them is more Elektra than Oedipal........The special effects are amateurish, and the action sequences are clumsy, but the costumes look authentic and the interior scenes are filmed in real palaces. In some scenes, the costumes and the furnishings upstage the actors......So far as I know, the series is faithful to the actual events of Catherine's life. There's no horse fucking because, sadly, that never actually happened. She did, however, have a number of lovers and her affairs are dramatized in a bodice ripper kind of way. Not much nudity though. I can understand being discreet about Queen Victoria's love scenes, but the Empress Catherine deserves more graphic nudity........The Russians have no concept of political correctness. The Turks are portrayed as utterly vile, and the Gypsies are thieves. Catherine was a full blown kraut, but they take pains to depict the other Prussians as treacherous.

langford peel said...



This was a terrible mistake by the God Emperor. Once again the globalists and the neocons have achieved their goals.

They delayed the bombing long enough for the Russians to flee and get their military assets out of harms way. Long enough for the Syrians to hide the poison gas. It is all kabuki theater. Bubba bait for the boobs.

The only hopeful sign is that the President said we had no designs on remaining in Syria. Now is the time to withdraw and let the Syrians sort it out. Let the Russians and the Turks fight over the corpse. Just ban any Syrians from entering the United States. Let Europe adsorb the rapists and terrorist and all around piece of shit Muslims that destroy everything they touch. Put America First.

No more endless wars in the Middle East. No more endless expenditures in the Middle East. Leave them to rot. They are worthless pieces of shit who are never going to worth a bucket of warm spit. Fuck them and the camel they rode in on.

Hagar said...

The raid on Michael Cohen may have been "legitimate" under normal circumstances. The problem is that this is a highly charged political situation where the FBI has already been caught "dirty" and there is justifiable reason to doubt that the "scrubbing team" will not share whatever they can find about Trump exclusive of Cohen with Mueller's team.

langford peel said...

The other big winner this week was Paul Ryan.

As Mickey Kraus said:

"Ryan's speaker ship was a huge success for his backers: He stopped Trump. Wasted Trump's first two years on his (Not Trump's) agenda. Will likely leave Trump with a Dem House that will block Trump for the next two years. Now he gets his paycheck."

This is how the permanent government, the Duopoly, the Deep State just the Swamp works."

Chuck said...

Robert Cook; you are most welcome, to think that U.S. intelligence, or British intelligence, or French intelligence, or the U.S. military/industrial complex are all unreliable.

You may, if you wish, declare that the Western mainstream media are all unreliable.

They all seem to agree that there was a chlorine gas attack in Douma; if you think it is all a hoax (and you agree with what Scott Adams said a couple of days ago), that's fine.

What I want to drive home is that President Trump, and Ambassador Haley, and Secretary Mattis, and John Bolton all say that the chemical attack happened, it was real, and it was the predicate for U.S. military action.

gnossos said...

Am I the only one that thinks the Syrian attack was meant for China's and NK's appreciation.

Sort of like that announcement over desert at Mar a lago?

The most impressive part of the operation, to me, was the intricate and involved co-operation and support of the three countries' military assets. I think that was also another "message." That the same, very effective, co-operation could be used on the other side of the world.

Narayanan Subramanian said...

Andy McCarthy as hero ...
He calls himself an alum of SDNY/FBI.
Whose revolving door /
jurisdiction / clientele / hunting territory is Wall Street.
Did not Mueller and Comey also pass through ?

Robert Cook said...

@Chuck at 12:22 PM:

Yes, I know they said it happened and have used that as the predicate for U.S. military action. However, even it the gas attack happened, and even if it was Assad who did it, that is insufficient to make it legal for us to mount military action in Syria. That requires a vote approving such action by the UN Security Council.

Once again, (and not the first time under Trump), the U.S. embarks on illegal military action abroad, (made worse by the fact that we don't know exactly what happened or who the perpetrators were).

cf said...

This post and last night's cafe are the first with art in a while. It seems Althouse is purposefully toning down (or up) the look of the blog to exclude all but these tiny graphic shapes that is our language.

when I scrolled the full length the other day -- entirely Text! Bright white background, no art, Orange lead-ins with their short or longer blocks of bkack text and soft blue links.

No art! Stark and readerly. It was different from the visual variety of the past. I hit the "older posts" button twice to see any visual that were not letterforms.

Inntgat expanse, suddely an oasis, two posts right together, the inside of a white cubicle and the pink pussy pants of supposedly serious "Woo-mahn!"

The next break in the scrolls of language was a stark shape of rod iron, singular again on its entire page of posts.

I am refreshed for it, enjoying the view. Salud.

And now these lively abstractions.

Narayanan Subramanian said...

Trump era as ' Beverley Hills / Wall Street cop ' ?

In addition to caddyshack

Chuck said...

Robert Cook said...
@Chuck at 12:22 PM:

Yes, I know they said it happened and have used that as the predicate for U.S. military action. However, even it the gas attack happened, and even if it was Assad who did it, that is insufficient to make it legal for us to mount military action in Syria. That requires a vote approving such action by the UN Security Council.

Once again, (and not the first time under Trump), the U.S. embarks on illegal military action abroad, (made worse by the fact that we don't know exactly what happened or who the perpetrators were).


So you are taking what is essentially a principled stand in opposition to the Trump move. (Trump, acting uncharacteristically in coordination with the UK and France.)

Fair enough! I respect that. In fact, I feel very much in agreement with you. I would much prefer there being a much more formalized process in all of this. A UN declaration would be good, just as you say. But moreover, a Congressional Authorization for the Use of Military Force.

I frankly don't know why Trump didn't try that; some Democrats would vote against Trump if Trump proposed that the sun rise in the east and set in the west as part of a "World is Round" bill. But wouldn't many Democrats vote for the use of force to check Syria's deployment of chemical weapons versus civilians? Wouldn't all Republicans (except perhaps Rand Paul) vote in the affirmative.

I want to be careful here. You and I, Robert Cook, are going to end up having a perfectly decent, sincere and reasonable exchange about policy. When my own goal in raising this subject was to slam Scott Adams.

cf said...

Please excuse my mispells, and meant to end:

And now these latest lively abstractions.
I am refreshed for it, and enjoying the view. Salud.

cf said...

And someone wondered if women posted here. I am one.

Inga said...

“This was a terrible mistake by the God Emperor. Once again the globalists and the neocons have achieved their goals”

Because he’s one of them dummy. Who knew he wouldn’t hold true to his campaign promises of no foreign entanglements? We on the left.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hagar said...

gnossos said...
Am I the only one that thinks the Syrian attack was meant for China's and NK's appreciation.


Not by a long shot.

Inga said...

Why the hell did do you think he picked Bolton for NSA? Put two and two together.

Steve Uhr said...

blizzard in mpls today. 15-20 inches total. What month is this?

rhhardin said...

Ha. Got my North Dakota. I had to go to 20m to find it, with an antenna particularly unsuited to 20m (a 40m vertical).

traditionalguy said...

What if the CIA has run its own Army, Navy, and Airforce for 40 years that does whatever it wants whenever it wants, or else. And Trump has been taking it out one secret installation at a time. Why did North
Korea roll over and do what it was told? Trump removed the Deep State control over it. And why did Saudis just roll over and do what Trump ordered ? The same answer.

Trump just did it to the Syrian ISIS guys too.

pacwest said...

"That requires a vote approving such action by the UN Security Council."

Sounds good in theory. What do you figure the odds of the Security Council EVER approving such an action?

My question is a serious one. While some other means of enforcing international law may be possible by some means in the future the UNSC is not one of them. What you are proposing is non-enforcement.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the US should police the world. I think that we should set a few out that dont effect us directly to let others know they need to step up by themselves. I would love to see military expenditures cut by half or more, but your solution to international wrongdoing appears to me to be untenable.

Jupiter said...

Blogger Bay Area Guy said...

"Is there any organized non-scum in Syria to fight back against Assad? Not sure. I'd need to bone up on the issue."

Let me help out. They're all Muslims. So, no, no non-scums. Everyone there is a member by choice of a criminal gang claiming the right to prey upon non-members.

Jupiter said...

Well, not all, I guess. Assad is an Alawite. I don't think preying upon non-members is actually a matter of religious doctrine with them, just a habit they've picked up from hanging around with Muslims.

rehajm said...

Nice job rhhardin.

narciso said...

reasons for concern:


https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/2017-10-30/syrias-extremist-opposition

narciso said...

about the other matter:


https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/04/13/the-small-group-knew-theyd-lose-the-fact-battle-so-they-began-a-propaganda-war/

Robert Cook said...

"I would much prefer there being a much more formalized process in all of this. A UN declaration would be good, just as you say. But moreover, a Congressional Authorization for the Use of Military Force."

Yes, Congressional declaration of war is required--I'm not sure if an AUFM is Constitutionally sufficient--but even that would be legally insufficient without approval by the UN Security Council...unless Syria were attacking or about to attack us or an ally of ours.

narciso said...

well it depends on the extent and depth of the operation,


http://donsurber.blogspot.com/2018/04/mueller-is-irrelevant.html

Robert Cook said...

"'That requires a vote approving such action by the UN Security Council.'

"Sounds good in theory. What do you figure the odds of the Security Council EVER approving such an action?

"My question is a serious one. While some other means of enforcing international law may be possible by some means in the future the UNSC is not one of them. What you are proposing is non-enforcement."


Perhaps, but the purpose of the UNSC is to prohibit military action more often than not, as the point of the UN is to end war. But, did we even go the UN Security Council to try to secure a vote? We're legally required to. Is the evidence against Assad strong enough to bring about a likely majority vote approving action against him? Not from what we know. And...who is really being harmed by our strikes? Assad...or Syrian civilians? Is a military strike an appropriate and effective response, even if it were justified legally? Will it accomplish what we say we want to accomplish? (Which is...what?)

Drago said...

Ings: "Who knew he wouldn’t hold true to his campaign promises of no foreign entanglements? We on the left."

LOL

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN179058

Lucien said...

President Trump’s policy on Syria seems clear and logical: 1) we are not interested in involvement in Syria’s civil war; but 2) if the Assad regime uses chemical weapons we will hit them with a big stick,and if they keep doing it the stick will keep getting bigger.

No nation building,no idiotic “Pottery Barn rule”, just the policy stated above.

Why do folks have so much trouble getting this?

Drago said...

Hagar: "...and there is justifiable reason to doubt that the "scrubbing team" will not share whatever they can find about Trump exclusive of Cohen with Mueller's team."

The Mueller/SDNY Democrat Opposition Research Under Guise Of Criminal Investigatiin has already done just that.

And it only took 48 hours.

Drago said...

Lucien: "Why do folks have so much trouble getting this?"

Because Field Marshall and LLR Chuck and his Aide de Camp Inga need it all to be something different than what it is.

Obviously.

Big Mike said...

Thirty million men without even remote prospects of wives told that if they win the battle they get to rape the women? No danger to world peace from that!

narciso said...

some times signals need to be sent:

https://pjmedia.com/claudiarosett/importance-striking-syrias-scientific-studies-research-center/

re briody, a fascinating person is kept out of the reports, of his dalliances, a greater ethical breach involving steven rattner's quadrangle, where he paid 10 million dollar fine, so he could remain on morning jokes version of Hollywood square,

pacwest said...

"Perhaps,"

Perhaps? At least be honest enough to say there is 0% chance.

"but the purpose of the UNSC is to prohibit military action more often than not, as the point of the UN is to end war."

It was my understanding it was set up to mediate conflict. It is because it is all but useless in this regard that your investment in it is misplaced.

"But, did we even go the UN Security Council to try to secure a vote?"

To what purpose? It is a known outcome. It might be a good excuse for inaction if that is your goal. However relying on the UNSC to be on the side of American interests over a whole range of issues is a recipe for national suicide.

"We're legally required to."

That is not my understanding of what we signed onto, but I can't cite the relevant stuff right now. I'll be back on that.

"Is the evidence against Assad strong enough to bring about a likely majority vote approving action against him? Not from what we know."

GB, France and the US seemed to think so. Where do you think the gas came from, separate from who you think deployed it?

"And...who is really being harmed by our strikes? Assad...or Syrian civilians? Is a military strike an appropriate and effective response, even if it were justified legally?"

I think the target was Assad's CW assets. How effective was it in that regard? Not very, imo.

"Will it accomplish what we say we want to accomplish?"

Possibly. Possibly not. Plus unintended consequences.

"(Which is...what?)"

Yea. An easy one I can answer with relative assurity. Future deterrence of CW (WMD) by Assad (and others).

narciso said...

the times left this out,

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/nyregion/04pension.html?_r=0

Bay Area Guy said...

@Lucien sez:

"President Trump’s policy on Syria seems clear and logical: 1) we are not interested in involvement in Syria’s civil war; but 2) if the Assad regime uses chemical weapons we will hit them with a big stick,and if they keep doing it the stick will keep getting bigger.

No nation building,no idiotic “Pottery Barn rule”, just the policy stated above."

Very good summation.

"Why do folks have so much trouble getting this?"

Two valid reasons: (1) mission creep. We dip our toes in with bombing. He escalates, we escalate, he escalates, etc, etc, and then we're in the briar patch. (2) confusion factor. There's 4 or 5 different factions fighting, and it's hard to figure out who the good guys are, if any.

virgil xenophon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Roughcoat said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chuck said...

Robert Cook said...
"I would much prefer there being a much more formalized process in all of this. A UN declaration would be good, just as you say. But moreover, a Congressional Authorization for the Use of Military Force."

Yes, Congressional declaration of war is required--I'm not sure if an AUFM is Constitutionally sufficient--but even that would be legally insufficient without approval by the UN Security Council...unless Syria were attacking or about to attack us or an ally of ours.


Again you make a reasoned, measured, principled point with which I must agree and say that you stated it better than I.

Note the differences:

~You and I, in agreement, observe the principled legal requirements.

~Trump and the Administration and military take another position that is at least arguable; that the Syrian use of chemical weapons is a violation of international law and international norms that requires a response. (Albeit a response that Trump essentially condemned repeatedly and vociferously when Obama was doing it.)

~Scott Adams says that it was a hoax; the idea that Syria used chemical weapons.

Maybe the law doesn't matter to Scott Adams in any event. Early this week, Adams said "I no longer care about the fucking law."

madAsHell said...

Nancy Pelosi is in Seattle for the "March for Science"......maybe she wasn't invited to the San Francisco march?

"March for Science" Who comes up with these ideas? Which virtue are we signaling? Our virtue outweighs any sense of futility.

I'm completely convinced this is funded by tax dollars.

The good news? It's raining, and Pelosi's handlers are holding umbrellas to shield her from the rain. Does she share something in common with Margret Hamilton?

Drago said...

"Bowe Bergdahl republican" Chuck will never forgive Scott Adams for being so spot on about the election and Trumps presidency thus far while Vichy Chuck has looked hilariously buffoonish and rather exposed as a strong dem ally.

Thats the sort of thing Chuck cannot stand and causes him to lash out at women and children.

Its really rather sad.

Big Mike said...

@madAsHell, if Pelosi is there then it should be March for “Science”

walter said...

It's a good time to be in the shoe business.

Drago said...

It seems like only yesterday LLR Chuck was cackling over the hoax dossier and asserting strongly that Trump was not spied upon during the campaign!

LOL

It goes without saying both of those positions were strongly in alignment with the Democrat/lefty talking points of the day.

Unexpectedly.

Bad Lieutenant said...


Blogger rhhardin said...
So you think rape is funny, chickelit? I can't imagine what sort of mind thinks like that. Sad.



Civility bullshit

Inga said...

“The second part of the Russian series, Catherine The Great is now on Amazon Prime. It's worth seeing.”

I agree! It’s very well done and one can learn a few Russian words along the way.

walter said...

BL,
You do realize he was quoting Althouse?

Chuck said...

It seems like only yesterday LLR Chuck was cackling over the hoax dossier and asserting strongly that Trump was not spied upon during the campaign!


I am still cackling over the dossier. I haven't stopped cackling over the dossier. I've been cackling more about the dossier in the last week, than in the year previous, insofar as it appears that Trump was worried about what Melania might think about the dossier. I don't know if the dossier is all true; I think it is now clear that it isn't all accurate. I'm not sure about exactly what is and isn't accurate.

As for spying on Trump, what I asserted was that Trump had no proof that he was "wiretapped" as a function of Obama being "a bad (or sick) guy." I still say that. Trump should put up or shut up.

No, strike that. Trump should just shut up.

walter said...

Ah..You're in elevated space of Comey. Pissgate might be true!!!

Robert Cook said...

"It was my understanding it was set up to mediate conflict."

Yes...in order to end war. After the cataclysm of WWII, with virtually all of Europe in ruins, there was a desperate desire to create a mechanism by which mankind could end war. The United States was a powerful advocate for creating the UN, and the United States has been entering or starting wars almost constantly since that time.

Robert Cook said...

"To what purpose? It is a known outcome."

No, it's not.

"It might be a good excuse for inaction if that is your goal. However relying on the UNSC to be on the side of American interests over a whole range of issues is a recipe for national suicide."

It is not the UN's purpose to be "on the side of American interests." And why is bombing Syria in American interests?

Robert Cook said...

"'We're legally required to.'

"That is not my understanding of what we signed onto, but I can't cite the relevant stuff right now. I'll be back on that."


Yes, we're legally required to get UN Security Council approval before initiating military strikes against other nations, under the terms of the UN Charter, to which we're signatories, and which, under the Constitution, thus becomes "the supreme law of the land."

Of course, we violate the UN Charter all the time.

"'Is the evidence against Assad strong enough to bring about a likely majority vote approving action against him? Not from what we know.'

"GB, France and the US seemed to think so. Where do you think the gas came from, separate from who you think deployed it?"


That's not good enough. What information do they have that supports their "think so? GB proved in the Iraq war planning that they'll go along with anything we want them to. Why didn't Congress review the information and determine how convincing it was? It convincing, why didn't we go to the UN Security Council?

Because, like any kangaroo court, we don't care about following proper legal procedures.

"'And...who is really being harmed by our strikes? Assad...or Syrian civilians? Is a military strike an appropriate and effective response, even if it were justified legally?'

"I think the target was Assad's CW assets. How effective was it in that regard? Not very, imo."


How do we know that's were the missiles landed? How do we know that there was not significant collateral damage to innocent civilians, even if we did target alleged CW assets locations? How do we even know where Assad's CW assets are, or whether he actually has any?

pacwest said...

To what purpose? It is a known outcome."

"No, it's not."

You're wrong. It was/is. Wishful thinking won't make a difference. You honestly thought Russia would vote yes on an attack on one of its clients?

"It might be a good excuse for inaction if that is your goal. However relying on the UNSC to be on the side of American interests over a whole range of issues is a recipe for national suicide."

It is not the UN's purpose to be "on the side of American interests."

I didn't say that was it's purpose. If you *honestly* misread my statement, I'll clarify. I said that relying on the UN to 'allow' us to pursue what we believe to be in our best interests would be stupid. There are a whole range of issues where national interests of the US that conflict with other nation's who have veto power.

And why is bombing Syria in American interests?

Per the stated goals -to make sure that Syria and others are deterred from using CW- it is in our, and other nation's interests - per the US and others.

Again, I'm not making the case that bombing Syria this time is good policy, in fact I think it isn't, but to argue against your point that we should bow down to foreign interests in the UN.

Mr. Cook, your vision of a one world order where everyone can work out their differences is an admirable one, but you might have to wait a bit more for it to come about. There are some bad actors out there I'm afraid.


"Yes...in order to end war."

I haven't got around to researching my rebuttal on this one, but I think you are overstating your case here.

walter said...

Trump must have held a gun to Macron and May to force them to violate the rules of the UN cantina band.

Sebastian said...

I am lukewarm about bombing Syria. I do not think it accomplishes much. I do think congressional approval is required, particularly if there is a repeat.

But I like the fact that we take the UN and our "legal obligations" just as seriously as every other state thus far.

walter said...

DC looking to allow 16 year olds to vote..

gpm said...

>>DC looking to allow 16 year olds to vote

14 or fight!

--gpm

pacwest said...

News news news.

The CBO has revised estimates on GDP growth that show Trump's tax cuts will mostly pay for themselves. 3% continued future growth will make them revenue neutral.

Trump has come out in favor of letting states decide marijuana laws for themselves without federal interference.

Never a dull day.

walter said...

Say what? CBO only uses dynamic scoring in revisions?

pacwest said...

Seems they based their first projections on static scoring :)

pacwest said...

It's called the Krugman method.

walter said...

Well..that's been the hurdle when trying to get the legislation passed..just wasn't aware that they would concede it after passage.

walter said...

Btw, where are you reading that?

walter said...

Oh..via Insty:
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-tax-cuts-revenues-deficits-paying-for-themselves/

Robert Cook said...

"Mr. Cook, your vision of a one world order where everyone can work out their differences is an admirable one, but you might have to wait a bit more for it to come about. There are some bad actors out there I'm afraid."

Yes, and we are among the greatest of them.