Support NeoGAF

[lo escondido]

Yes, Obama is pretty incoherent on this issue. But I wonder if there can be a relatively coherent set of criteria for when intervention on humanitarian grounds is justified and when it isn't.



But surely it can't practically be all or nothing. We can't intervene everytime some group of villagers halfway across the world wants to kill the inhabitants of a neighboring village. At the same time, I think most people believe there is some point at which military intervention can be justified on humanitarian grounds, the question is whether you can draw a reasonably clear line between the two.

Threshold for military interventions
According to the International Commission for Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) Report in 2001 (which was not adopted by national governments), any form of a military intervention initiated under the premise of responsibility to protect must fulfill the following six criteria in order to be justified as an extraordinary measure of intervention:
Just Cause
Right Intention
Final Resort
Legitimate Authority
Proportional Means
Reasonable Prospect

.

 

[eznark]

Is this the first time Breyer and Thomas have been the only two on the same side of an issue?

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Yes, Obama is pretty incoherent on this issue. But I wonder if there can be a relatively coherent set of criteria for when intervention on humanitarian grounds is justified and when it isn't.

But surely it can't practically be all or nothing. We can't intervene everytime some group of villagers halfway across the world wants to kill the inhabitants of a neighboring village. At the same time, I think most people believe there is some point at which military intervention can be justified on humanitarian grounds, the question is whether you can draw a reasonably clear line between the two.

You're right. Practically, it can't be all or nothing. But certainly in this case, I don't think it's appropriate for the international community to have intervened. They picked a fight they couldn't win, and that shouldn't be our problem. I'm curious as to what you think a good standard would be, though.

I'm not arguing it isn't a civil war but thats doesn't make the two sides equal in their justifications one is still fighting for freedom and reform, the other is fighting for some genocidal maniac.

I didn't make any claims about the justifications of the respective combatants. I do think it's seriously problematic to claim that the international community should have a role in deciding the outcome of a civil war or the suppression of insurrection.

Just Cause
Right Intention
Final Resort
Legitimate Authority
Proportional Means
Reasonable Prospect

The Libyan Intervention fails on at least three, and arguably 4 of those counts.

 

[empty vessel]

I'm not arguing it isn't a civil war but thats doesn't make the two sides equal in their justifications one is still fighting for freedom and reform, the other is fighting for some genocidal maniac.

I don't think you know either of those things. I don't think any average westerner really has any idea what is happening in the country, although I am quite sure they have been told many things about what is happening in the country by other westerners. Qaddafi could not survive without some level of support. What makes whatever support he has in the country meaningless in comparison to whatever support the opposition has?

 

[Dude Abides]

Threshold for military interventions
According to the International Commission for Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) Report in 2001 (which was not adopted by national governments), any form of a military intervention initiated under the premise of responsibility to protect must fulfill the following six criteria in order to be justified as an extraordinary measure of intervention:
Just Cause
Right Intention
Final Resort
Legitimate Authority
Proportional Means
Reasonable Prospect.

Those are a bit too vague for my taste. Also, they seem to be more of a set of legal justifications rather than criteria for determining whether intervention is justified as a matter of policy.

 

[Cyan]

Yesterday, the Journal Sentinel had front page (online) news regarding the "Prosser choked fellow justice!!!!!) citing an anonymous source.

Today, the Journal now has two sources saying Bradley attacked Prosser who defended himself...and the story is now nowhere near the front page.

Classy!

Also, lol anonymous sources.

I take it Prosser is conservative and Bradley is liberal?

 

[eznark]

I take it Prosser is conservative and Bradley is liberal?

While true, it's besides the point. The JS decided to trumpet a sensationalized story based on a single anonymous source, then chose to bury the story as soon as multiple other (anonymous) sources refuted the claim.

Either way, both these idiots should resign.

Spoiler

The theater ensuing from dual Walker appointments would be the greatest thing ever

 

[polyh3dron]

Damn, look at Bachmann toning down the crazy.

 

[lo escondido]

You're right. Practically, it can't be all or nothing. But certainly in this case, I don't think it's appropriate for the international community to have intervened. They picked a fight they couldn't win, and that shouldn't be our problem. I'm curious as to what you think a good standard would be, though.


I didn't make any claims about the justifications of the respective combatants. I do think it's seriously problematic to claim that the international community should have a role in deciding the outcome of a civil war or the suppression of insurrection.


The Libyan Intervention fails on at least three, and arguably 4 of those counts.

IMO:

Just Cause = protecting people from a massacre
Final Resort = gaddafi's troops were in bengazi and attacking the protestors
Proportional means = only protecting the rebels and disabling gadaffi's ability to harm innocents. (we are specifically not targeting him, though I wouldn't mind if we did)
Reasonable Prospects = gaddafi's is losing power everyday, the mission will be a success.

Those are my feelings the only one I can kind of see disagreement on is Proportional means.

I don't think you know either of those things. I don't think any average westerner really has any idea what is happening in the country, although I am quite sure they have been told many things about what is happening in the country by other westerners. Qaddafi could not survive without some level of support. What makes whatever support he has in the country meaningless in comparison to whatever support the opposition has?

I know for a fact gaddafi is a crazy loon.

And I think by watching countless reports from the country, looking at history, statements from both sides (and the arab league and other regional groups) one can draw pretty good conclusions.

And his support is mostly ethnic and fear based.

Your apologetics for the likes of Castro, Chavez, Iran, Gadaffi are really messed up

Those are a bit too vague for my taste. Also, they seem to be more of a set of legal justifications rather than criteria for determining whether intervention is justified as a matter of policy.

Your not going to get a checklist that tells you when and when not to interven, nothing is that black and white. I feel the only thing you really can make decisions on are broad conditions weighed against current situations

 

[Loudninja]

Blago Jury Reaches a Verdict

Jurors in the Rod Blagojevich corruption trial have signaled to Judge James Zagel that they have verdict.

They've said they have come to a unanimous decision on 18 counts and are undecided on two other counts.

The verdict will be read at 1 p.m. Stay tuned to WARD ROOM and NBCChicago for all your Blagojevich needs.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Blago-Jury-Reaches-a-Verdict-124595579.html

 

[Kosmo]

Damn, look at Bachmann toning down the crazy.

Of course she did/will, just like Obama toned down his redistributive change rhetoric in 2008, other than his one slip-up with Joe the Plumber. That being said, she doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination, IMO.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Of course she did/will, just like Obama toned down his redistributive change rhetoric in 2008, other than his one slip-up with Joe the Plumber. That being said, she doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination, IMO.

Oh come on, that wasn't a slip up. He was merely making a point about what taxes are: redistribution of wealth.

 

[empty vessel]

Your apologetics for the likes of Castro, Chavez, Iran, Gadaffi are really messed up

Oh, look, it's like a who's who of official US enemies. I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

IMO:

Just Cause = protecting people from a massacre
Final Resort = gaddafi's troops were in bengazi and attacking the protestors
Proportional means = only protecting the rebels and disabling gadaffi's ability to harm innocents. (we are specifically not targeting him, though I wouldn't mind if we did)
Reasonable Prospects = gaddafi's is losing power everyday, the mission will be a success.

Those are my feelings the only one I can kind of see disagreement on is Proportional means.

Just Cause: Intervention in a civil war doesn't cut it here, I think, but reasonable people might diasgree here.

Right Intention: Obvious

Final Resort: I don't think we'd exhausted every diplomatic avenue, and the rebels did have the option of laying down their arms.

Legitimate Authority: Also pretty clear.

Proportional Means: You've gotta be pretty dense if you think we're not bombing Qaddafi directly. And NATO's campaign against Qaddafi is pretty asymmetrical--we're bombing people who can't really shoot back.

Reasonable Prospect: "days, not weeks"

 

[polyh3dron]

Of course she did/will, just like Obama toned down his redistributive change rhetoric in 2008, other than his one slip-up with Joe the Plumber. That being said, she doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination, IMO.

aaaaahahahahahaHAHAHAHA

 

[Kosmo]

aaaaahahahahahaHAHAHAHA

Wel, OK, maybe he didn't tone it down - he did have people voting for him who thought he would pay their mortgage and buy them a new car.

:-/

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Wel, OK, maybe he didn't tone it down - he did have people voting for him who thought he would pay their mortgage and buy them a new car.

:-/

And you were being so clever before... {sigh}

 

[Arde5643]

And you were being so clever before... {sigh}

You're just asking for the impossible there.

 

[Kosmo]

And you were being so clever before... {sigh}

I have my ups and downs - enjoy the ups.

 

[reilo]

enjoy the ups.

Drugs are bad, mmkay?

 

[Kosmo]

Blago Jury Reaches a Verdict

http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Blago-Jury-Reaches-a-Verdict-124595579.html

He's got to be guilty - "I've got this thing, and it's fucking golden...." case closed.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

A bit OT, but is there any way to block senders from constantly bombarding me with emails on Hotmail? Everytime I see a new message pop up I'm hoping I'm hearing something back from the hiring process I'm going through, but it always end up being something from Obama's campaign. This is the second email I've received so far today. It's fucking annoying as hell.

 

[Kosmo]

A bit OT, but is there any way to block senders from constantly bombarding me with emails on Hotmail? Everytime I see a new message pop up I'm hoping I'm hearing something back from the hiring process I'm going through, but it always end up being something from Obama's campaign. This is the second email I've received so far today. It's fucking annoying as hell.

Too late dude, you've been assimilated. Resistance is futile.

 

[RustyNails]

A bit OT, but is there any way to block senders from constantly bombarding me with emails on Hotmail? Everytime I see a new message pop up I'm hoping I'm hearing something back from the hiring process I'm going through, but it always end up being something from Obama's campaign. This is the second email I've received so far today. It's fucking annoying as hell.

Jason's Ultimatum, I choose YOU

 

[reilo]

A bit OT, but is there any way to block senders from constantly bombarding me with emails on Hotmail? Everytime I see a new message pop up I'm hoping I'm hearing something back from the hiring process I'm going through, but it always end up being something from Obama's campaign. This is the second email I've received so far today. It's fucking annoying as hell.

Click the unsubscribe link in the email?

 

[Tamanon]

A bit OT, but is there any way to block senders from constantly bombarding me with emails on Hotmail? Everytime I see a new message pop up I'm hoping I'm hearing something back from the hiring process I'm going through, but it always end up being something from Obama's campaign. This is the second email I've received so far today. It's fucking annoying as hell.

Should be able to unsubscribe through the email. Some smaller outfits it doesn't work, especially ones you never signed up for, but otherwise you should be able to unsubscribe.

Now if I could figure out who gave my email address to the Minuteman group, and Bill Keller's Daily Devotional, I'd know who to pound. Unsubscribing hasn't worked for them, and I really don't need to hear about Obama's Amnesty plan every day.

 

[Kosmo]

Click the unsubscribe link in the email?

Yes, best advice for unwanted email, LOL

Create a filter for "Obama" - Immediately send to trash. Problem solved.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Reilo, you are WISE.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Of course she did/will, just like Obama toned down his redistributive change rhetoric in 2008, other than his one slip-up with Joe the Plumber. That being said, she doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination, IMO.

Yeah, how crazy of him.

Anything but the "Actual" figure in that chart? Crazy talk. It's perfectly reasonable to have the top 20% hold 85% of the actual wealth in the country, with the bottom 40% owning less than 1%.

Oh, and the stats have gotten worse sinec that chart was made.

It's because of people like you who lie about our current state of affairs, from tax policy to foreign aid spending, that we can't get anything done. You've convinced everyone that they're being treated much more fairly than they are, that the rich are having a much harder time than they really are, that the international community is out to get us, that liberals within the government enacitng radical socialized communist healthcare in the form of private insurance exchanges have done more to cause the country's economic problems than reaganomics and the neglect of education and infrastructure by conservatives.

Equating the notion of increasing the middle and poor class's share of the pie to calling gay marriage the biggest problem our nation has faced in the last thirty years. Thank you for doing your part to ruin my country, Kosmo. You lying sack of shit.

 

[mckmas8808]

Of course she did/will, just like Obama toned down his redistributive change rhetoric in 2008, other than his one slip-up with Joe the Plumber. That being said, she doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination, IMO.

Why do conservatives like you still not understand the basics when it comes down to a progressive tax scale?

 

[eznark]

Equating the notion of increasing the middle and poor class's share of the pie to calling gay marriage the biggest problem our nation has faced in the last thirty years. Thank you for doing your part to ruin my country, Kosmo. You lying sack of shit.

rage!!

 

[GaimeGuy]

rage!!

I just wish for once I could engage with a conservative who wasn't blatantly lying ("Death panels!") or distorting the facts through wordplay or contextual omissions. ("The top 50% pay 95% of all income taxes!")

It seems like every single "fact" brought up by conservatives is one or the other.

A philosophy without logic is a philosophy without merit.

 

[Krauser Kat]

It's because of people like you who lie about our current state of affairs, from tax policy to foreign aid spending, that we can't get anything done. You've convinced everyone that they're being treated much more fairly than they are, that the rich are having a much harder time than they really are, that the international community is out to get us, that liberals within the government enacitng radical socialized communist healthcare in the form of private insurance exchanges have done more to cause the country's economic problems than reaganomics and the neglect of education and infrastructure by conservatives.

Equating the notion of increasing the middle and poor class's share of the pie to calling gay marriage the biggest problem our nation has faced in the last thirty years. Thank you for doing your part to ruin my country, Kosmo. You lying sack of shit.

Woah Woah, Simmer down now. Regardless of how crazy you think Kosmo, is slandering him is not going to help anything.

Its getting close to primary time, where this board either goes Full hype train, or we actually disseminate and let more conservative people in here to root for their candidates.

 

[Kosmo]

Equating the notion of increasing the middle and poor class's share of the pie to calling gay marriage the biggest problem our nation has faced in the last thirty years. Thank you for doing your part to ruin my country, Kosmo. You lying sack of shit.

I'm for gay marriage...moving along.

As for the distribution of wealth, the amount that the upper 0.1% has accumulated in the past 20 years or so really has little effect. The economy still has to survive by companies catering to the vast majority of the population no matter how much wealth the rich are sitting on.

 

[empty vessel]

I'm for gay marriage...moving along.

As for the distribution of wealth, the amount that the upper 0.1% has accumulated in the past 20 years or so really has little effect. The economy still has to survive by companies catering to the vast majority of the population no matter how much wealth the rich are sitting on.

Er, what they have the rest of us don't. And since "what we have" is the end game of any economy, I'd say it "matters."

 

[Kosmo]

Er, what they have the rest of us don't. And since "what we have" is the end game of any economy, I'd say it "matters."

To your day to day life, no it doesn't, because companies cannot survive by only catering to the top 0.01% unless you're in the yacht building business.

 

[reilo]

To your day to day life, no it doesn't, because companies cannot survive by only catering to the top 0.01% unless you're in the yacht building business.

The ignorance being displayed in a single post is astounding.

 

[Manmademan]

To your day to day life, no it doesn't, because companies cannot survive by only catering to the top 0.01% unless you're in the yacht building business.

I'd say it does, since the implication is that the top 1% or so have been increasing their wealth at the expense of everyone else.

While their income has exploded, the income for every other group has stagnated or even dropped in some cases. It might be a coincidence, but it isn't very likely.

correcting this means more disposable income for every other bracket, and since the economy largely runs on consumer spending, everyone benefits in the long run.

 

[Dude Abides]

Your not going to get a checklist that tells you when and when not to interven, nothing is that black and white. I feel the only thing you really can make decisions on are broad conditions weighed against current situations

Of course you can't have a checklist (more than 100,000 casualties? yes or no) but perhaps we can come up with something a little more well-defined than "just cause" and "proportional."

 

[GhaleonEB]

To your day to day life, no it doesn't, because companies cannot survive by only catering to the top 0.01% unless you're in the yacht building business.

The wealthy have been accumulating that wealth. Had it entered the economy in the form of broader wage increases, it would very much affect day to day life.

Your post is mind-boggling, Kosmo.

 

[GaimeGuy]

I'm for gay marriage...moving along.

As for the distribution of wealth, the amount that the upper 0.1% has accumulated in the past 20 years or so really has little effect. The economy still has to survive by companies catering to the vast majority of the population no matter how much wealth the rich are sitting on.

It doesn't sound like you understood a thing of what I was saying.

Michelle bachmann thinks gay marriage is the biggest problem our country has faced in the last 30 years.

Obama thinks that it is unfair that the rich are absurdly disproportionately wealthy compared to the rest of the country, and that they continue to improve financially while the majority of americans suffer.

You implicitely equated the two statements in craziness. Stop lying. Stop presenting false equivalences. Stop missing the forest for the trees.

I am just so sick of seeing falsehoods dominate half or more of the political spectrum in the US. Why do I always feel like I spend more time debunking misconceptions or correcting lies when I argue politics with conservatives instead of debating policy or philosophy? I don't feel like I'm arguing, I feel like I'm spending all my time establishing the facts and we never get to the actual argument because the lies never stop.
Damn it, i care about fixing problems, not proving my world view is correct, so it's frustrating to see nothing but lies, lies, lies, since it points to a different ultimate goal

The only reason you should be lying is if your goal is establishing your view as correct. "Winning," if you will. Grow up.

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

Kosmo i've found many of your posts to be distilled non sequiturs

How doesn't the funneling of wealth into a tight group of individuals not affect our daily lives?

This isn't about catering to a small group, business wise, these guys are still doing business to us, but in a way that is essentially a positive sum game for them without us even knowing it. Not to mention changing government policy to help funnel that wealth even more when it could, idk, help that middle class thing i heard about, or those in desperate poverty.

nope, apparently wealth consolidation doesn't have any tangible effect on the daily lives of those the wealth is being in a sense taken from

 

[Kosmo]

It doesn't sound like you understood a thing of what I was saying.

Michelle bachmann thinks gay marriage is the biggest problem our country has faced in the last 30 years.

Obama thinks that it is unfair that the rich are absurdly disproportionately wealthy compared to the rest of the country, and that they continue to improve financially while the majority of americans suffer.

You implicitely equated the two statements in craziness. Stop lying. Stop presenting false equivalences. Stop missing the forest for the trees.

I am just so sick of seeing falsehoods dominate half or more of the political spectrum in the US. Why do I always feel like I spend more time debunking misconceptions or correcting lies when I argue politics with conservatives instead of debating policy or philosophy? I don't feel like I'm arguing, I feel like I'm spending all my time establishing the facts and we never get to the actual argument because the lies never stop.
Damn it, i care about fixing problems, not proving my world view is correct, so it's frustrating to see nothing but lies, lies, lies, since it points to a different ultimate goal

The only reason you should be lying is if your goal is establishing your view as correct. "Winning," if you will. Grow up.

You feel your world view is correct and the solution for fixing the problems - as do most.

Kosmo i've found many of your posts to be distilled non sequiturs

How doesn't the funneling of wealth into a tight group of individuals not affect our daily lives?

This isn't about catering to a small group, business wise, these guys are still doing business to us, but in a way that is essentially a positive sum game for them without us even knowing it. Not to mention changing government policy to help funnel that wealth even more when it could, idk, help that middle class thing i heard about, or those in desperate poverty.

nope, apparently wealth consolidation doesn't have any tangible effect on the daily lives of those the wealth is being in a sense taken from

Please provide me a tangible effect that you see in your life.

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

Way to cherry pick one sentence in his post and reply with a dry and worthless meme which adds nothing to the conversation at hand. I hold Gaf to an at least decent intellectual standard, don't mess up that perception

 

[Chichikov]

Obama thinks that it is unfair that the rich are absurdly disproportionately wealthy compared to the rest of the country, and that they continue to improve financially while the majority of americans suffer.

What makes you think this is true?
Surely, it can't be his track record in the White House or even the senate.

I hold Gaf to an at least decent intellectual standard.

Ahh yes, that's your problem right there.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Yeah, how crazy of him.

Anything but the "Actual" figure in that chart? Crazy talk. It's perfectly reasonable to have the top 20% hold 85% of the actual wealth in the country, with the bottom 40% owning less than 1%.

Oh, and the stats have gotten worse sinec that chart was made.

It's because of people like you who lie about our current state of affairs, from tax policy to foreign aid spending, that we can't get anything done. You've convinced everyone that they're being treated much more fairly than they are, that the rich are having a much harder time than they really are, that the international community is out to get us, that liberals within the government enacitng radical socialized communist healthcare in the form of private insurance exchanges have done more to cause the country's economic problems than reaganomics and the neglect of education and infrastructure by conservatives.

Equating the notion of increasing the middle and poor class's share of the pie to calling gay marriage the biggest problem our nation has faced in the last thirty years. Thank you for doing your part to ruin my country, Kosmo. You lying sack of shit.

That chart should go into the pictures that make you angry thread.

 

[empty vessel]

Please provide me a tangible effect that you see in your life.

Most middle class people are making thousands of dollars less in income than they otherwise would. Every year. If that's not tangible enough for you, I would be happy for you to cut me a check for about $10,000 every year.

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

Please provide me a tangible effect that you see in your life.

ok BUD, we lost our house, make 50,000 less than 2 years ago which was nice but the wages stayed the same for a good 10 years before, etc. but the CEO sure did get a nice golden parachute.

get the fuck out of here with that, dude. wealth consolidation is real, and its consequences are human

 

[Manmademan]

Please provide me a tangible effect that you see in your life.

quite a bit of this "wealth funneling" has been done in the form of excessive tax breaks to the top 1%, as well as tax "forgiveness" and breaks to corporations due to the "trickle down" theory.

Why are dividends only taxed at 15%? Why is there a cap on social security contributions, rather than a flat percentage across the board?

meanwhile schools are broke and infrastructure is crumbling. That tax money could have been put to better use creating jobs to fix our roads and highways, or improve underfunded school districts. both of those things would be immediately noticeable in my daily everyday life.

 

[Kosmo]

Most middle class people are making thousands of dollars less in income than they otherwise would. Every year. If that's not tangible enough for you, I would be happy for you to cut me a check for about $10,000 every year.

Really, now? Where would you say the vast wealth that is being "sat upon" was made in last 20 years? I would say, for the most part, it was internet companies and companies on Wall Street (Russian oligarchs excluded, of course). Are you suggesting that those companies should have paid their employees more, rather than paying it, for example, in CEO bonuses?