Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
CBCS Comics
Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
.
A commercial jet leaving a commercial airport. Nearly every passenger headed to North America. In the air for 3 minutes, then shot down.

But...

It was an accident.

Iran says so.

They wouldn’t lie.

Case closed.

Phew! Glad that’s resolved.
Post 76 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedOne1944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steverogers11
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
.
If there were 63 Americans killed on that flight, it would be a whole different outcome and response.

Totally agree with u. Of course it would be a different response. Terrible what happened to you country and others that are having to go through this



I have serious doubts that it was an "Accident", but... let's just give them another pass. after all it was only 63 Canadians(this Time).... So that's ok? Seriously? Is that what we're saying here?


What about the thousands of service men and women they've already killed and maimed? They don't count either?

Let's just stick our heads in the sand and hope it goes away again.

Unfortunately, they will continue to take advantage of how naive we are and continue with their terrorist activities which will result in more killing.

Their proxies are no doubt plotting their next targets at this very moment.

Unfortunately it's not going to go away until it is confronted. At least we didn't appease them with another airdrop of $150 Billion in cash.

Does anybody actually believe that if these radicals had access to a nuclear device that they wouldn't use it?


OK back to comics. Maybe Sgt Rock can make some sense of it all.

The main issue that happens when bombs and missiles start flying is people start rationalizing that everything they believe and think is true and the other guy has to be of course entirely at fault. You dont get to the bottom of problems and resolve them until or unless you manage to accept that both sides have valid concerns and there is a history here, that we had a lot to do with causing.
If you look at the situation from the flip side, and go back to when the United states installed the Shah of iran, (and propped up his regime for years) whose murderous regime slaughtered thousands, with impunity, until finally fleeing the country to reside in France you might well understand some of the hate and anger directed towards America.
Does that justify blowing up buses and killing chilren or shooting down airliners...no. We did the same ourselves to an airliner a few years back in Iranian Territory no less.

Iran was caught up in the moment tossing missiles at their hated enemy, the united states, who represents so many of the very causes they most detest, including the forced apartheid status created in Israel. In the heat of the moment they saw an airplane coming in, thought it was a US response and took it out...bad snap decisions, and worse decision making, but likely all in the heat of a moment.
It isn't up to the United states to "give anyone a pass" or not...it wasn't our plane and not our people. That is the decision Canada and the others need to make for themselves and respond accordingly.

What about the thousands of service men and women they have killed or maimed already....fair enough...what about the millions we have killed with bombing, invasions, failed coups, CIA backed shadow leaders, insurgencies, and failed operations, and misguided drone strikes.. Nooone gets a pass here and everyones hands are dirty...if we weren't in invading a foreign country on false pretenses against international opinion...we wouldnt be losing our beloved troops and soldiers, but someone cried WMD and sent in the troops.

Unfortunately they will take advantage of how forgiving we are , and continue with their drone strikes in sovereign countries, their blacklist CIA assinations, their crippling sanctions over a pact we were following, that was endorsed and agreed to by the entire international community?

oh and this 150 billion dollar airdrop idiocy, which never happened. The truth is the international community unfroze that amount of Iranian assets, money that was theirs, due to their following the terms of the proposed nuclear treaty , that we then VIOLATED. There was no airdrop of cash, and that entire argument is based on innuendo at the most poor level of thinking.


https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/obama-didnt-give-iran-150-billion-in-cash/

Does anyone believe if these radicals had access to a nuclear device they wouldnt use it? and we haven't? I seem to remember the united states bombing two large civilian centers to end another war at massive cost in life to the Japanese....so it isn't like we get a pass as somehow being more moral or less radical ourselves.

We either break the pattern of hate and bombing and killing and wars we have used as our go to method of negotiation while paying the expense in American lives or we continue with business as usual...but no, we dont get a pass either...both sides are bloody, and have hated and killed equally.


That being said, the loss of life in the plane shoot down is saddening, sickening, and does call for an international community to work together to get reparations, and every effort made to help those affected. Truly saddening, and My only hope is someday we break the cycle of evil and hate and idiocy we have invested in and all men learn to work together as one to make our world better.
Post 77 IP   flag post
Collector EbaySeller private msg quote post Address this user
Forum Prediction Poll; Does this thread get locked Before or After Towmater returns from suspension?

Vote B for Before

Vote A for After

B
Post 78 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
Just the basic math for a 150 billion cash drop. Suppose it were in 100 dollar bills right..so 1 billion 500 million bills. If each weighed a quarter an ounce that would add up this way. Three hundred seventy five million ounces..or 11 thousand five hundred TONS of 100 dollar bills. Roughly 1-8 of all hundred dollar bills in circulation. Enough hundreds to fill a football stadium to the box seats but sure it happened !
Post 79 IP   flag post
Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
.
📌
Post 80 IP   flag post


Collector IronMan private msg quote post Address this user
Darkseid largely beat me to it.

But I will repeat part of what was said: It was not 150 billion, that's a made up figure that appears to be first mentioned by 45. At the time it was stated to be about 57 billion by US officials. Independent Iranian experts said it was more likely in the mid 40's billions. Regardless - this was Iran's money. US and allies froze their bank accounts as economic sanctions. When a deal was struck, US and allies unfroze the money and gave it back.

The idea this was pre-planned retaliation doesn't hold water. By far, the single largest group of victims were Iranian citizens. And there wasn't a single dead US citizen. Taught us a lesson, didn't they? Any place tensions are high and people's fingers are on the trigger, this sort of disaster can happen. And it happens to the US - as in our military accidentally shots down airliners or bombs civilians.

The only real solution that will make people safe is deescalation and diplomacy. Iran is a regional power and full out war there will be hell. And last what is the US - the world's water boy? France, Germany, Britain and Canada last time I looked are all modern nations with standing armies. They are perfectly capable of defending themselves - jointly or individually. If they declare war on Iran and ask for the USA's help, that is one thing.

BUT you don't see those nations clamoring for war. Because their leaders have been trying to preserve the deal with Iran and stop escalation. They believe US's 45 has been heading down the wrong path with Iran since he took office.
Post 81 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
Thank you Ironman, at least someone gets it. But wow I really wanted to see what that 11 thousand five hundred tons of hundred dollar bills looked like though.....
Post 82 IP   flag post
Collector Hexigore private msg quote post Address this user
Only 1.8 billion was in cash. The rest was in Walmart gift cards.
Post 83 IP   flag post
Collector EbaySeller private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
.both sides are bloody, and have hated and killed equally.


I hope I can ask this question without taking things off the rails, but do you truly equate the behavior of the US with the behavior of Iran? Asked another way, do you feel the world would be no worse off if roles were reversed and Iran controlled the worlds largest military arsenal rather than the US?
Post 84 IP   flag post
Collector Steverogers11 private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
.both sides are bloody, and have hated and killed equally.


I hope I can ask this question without taking things off the rails, but do you truly equate the behavior of the US with the behavior of Iran? Asked another way, do you feel the world would be no worse off if roles were reversed and Iran controlled the worlds largest military arsenal rather than the US?

What a world that would be right lol
Post 85 IP   flag post
Collector Drogio private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
.both sides are bloody, and have hated and killed equally.


I hope I can ask this question without taking things off the rails, but do you truly equate the behavior of the US with the behavior of Iran? Asked another way, do you feel the world would be no worse off if roles were reversed and Iran controlled the worlds largest military arsenal rather than the US?


You mean, like a multiverse....or dark multiverse?

Seriously though, what the hell was the government/military thinking when they were still allowing commercial flights while in such a heightened state of military action??? Did they even hault them when they were launching their ballistic missiles through the region?

Feels like that’s going to be the real root cause of this epic failure...
Post 86 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
.both sides are bloody, and have hated and killed equally.


I hope I can ask this question without taking things off the rails, but do you truly equate the behavior of the US with the behavior of Iran? Asked another way, do you feel the world would be no worse off if roles were reversed and Iran controlled the worlds largest military arsenal rather than the US?
equate behavior...
so if we go back to the CIA coup that placed the shah of Iran in power, and then propped him up as we turned deaf ears to the nature of his regime...US 1 Iran 0
Capturing the US embassy and taking 52 people hostage for an entire year....nope, we haven't tried that one yet...Iran 1 US 1
We could then work our way through fifty years of history trading drone strikes, assassinations, bombings , coups, and somewhere along the way it would likely turn out for each thing there was a cause and a response. A US and an Iranian one generally...equivocal.

People get angry and throw out there the Iraq war and the bombing of military vehicles, ambushes and so forth that cost thousands of American lives...but we never ask the hard questions. Did they kill those soldiers or did a false lie as a pretext for an invasion get them killed. Weapons of mass destruction were never found...but we went in, and bombed and killed and destroyed regardless. Was it Iraq or a failed policy that cost those lives?
Put another way, suppose in current context Iraq invaded Canada and was crushing it...people were being slaughtered, the army was in disarray and it appeared Canada was losing....friends and families of the various Canadians being killed begin moving across the border to take up the fight and help somehow..these are their friends, and relatives dying here. Since they lack military training and weaponry they fight as they can best, using bombs, traps, ambushes and other methods. The more americans that travel north, the more obstinate becomes the invader....until one day their leader goes on national TV and says to these very americans fighting to save their neighbors....."bring it on..." how do you suppose that might play out? Are they fanatics or patriots? Remember all of history is written by those who won the battle...and survived to tell their version of lies.

Equate....we are the worlds watchdog, policeman and guardian...but we also murder, destroy and slaughter with indignity and then label anyone we oppose as fanatics.....the only difference between an American screaming bomb them, send in the drones, …..as opposed to an Iranian QUD 4 soldier is an act of faith, one god vs another.

Equate...equal....guilty. We have done horrible things in the middle east, and continue doing so. Iran has responded in kind, and often eye for an eye...yes.
Our actions utilize lethal technology and calculated methods...drone strikes, assassinations, or using sanctions, and crippling a nations economy and methods of feeding its people.

We created an interanationl treaty to limit the production of enriched uranium necessary for constructing nuclear weapons in Iran..they agreed and began destroying and dismantling their centrifuges. Along comes Herr Tweetler, decides the deal isn't good enough by his terms, and exits our country and slams them with harsh and restrictive sanctions despite their compliance with the terms and the world leaders who were in agreement with the treaty and its terms. Equate? They aren't starving our women and children...but since that isn't demonstrating or chanting death to someone we dont consider ourselves...responsible.
Regarding if Iran controlled the world's largest military or arsenal...with great power comes great responsibility. They may rise to the moral challenge in that event, but history has shown generally most nations fail...each great ruling world order has fallen in on itself ...Egypt, the Roman empire, the Mongrol hordes, Alexander the great, even Hitler, all found that despite having more weapons, more soldiers or more technology in the end, it does not work to subjugate people against their free will.
Our own country is learning some of those same lessons..Korea ended in truce...Vietnam in outright defeat....but ask yourself, if we are the mighest arsenal, the greatest military, are we somehow morally or intellectually superior to others? Once we got the nuke we used it twice in a month...we have also shot down airliners full of people...remember the Japanese internment camps of world war 2? What makes you possibly think we are doing such a great job ourselves?
Our drone strokes carry with them some terminology...for instance, collateral damage, or our way of saying...oops, well that dint go well and we destroyed more than we should have.

Iran shot down an airliner filled with people and then yesterday was forced to admit their mistake...
Quite a few years ago a us Naval vessel shot down an Iranian flight in their own territory and when it became an international cry the US refused to admit their mistake. It went to the world courts, where the US was found guilty, and ordered to pay damages...we paid 213 thousand dollars to each person who lost someone on the flight, but we also denied any guilt, responsibility or blame. ...and still do. Iran admitted their mistake yesterday....equal? Equal is a damn hard word in that context...I love my country but I am also honest about our past, our problems and our actions.
Post 87 IP   flag post
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronMan
But I will repeat part of what was said: It was not 150 billion, that's a made up figure that appears to be first mentioned by 45. At the time it was stated to be about 57 billion by US officials. Independent Iranian experts said it was more likely in the mid 40's billions.

Meh, the Trumpiots don't care. It has been repeated ad nauseum, in every legitimate news source, that the US did not pay Iran one red cent, that it was just their own funds un-frozen. But Trump doesn't care what's true, and neither do his supporters. It's hardly worth talking about ... these people cannot be reasoned with. Logic and facts don't work on them.

Remember how they said they take Trump seriously, but not literally? Well, what that means is: they literally don't care if he just makes shit up. And they don't care if they are lying by proxy, by repeating stuff like that. They do it all the time. Truth no longer matters; laws no longer matter; only their anger matters.

As long as Trump is angry at Iran, or Muslims, or immigrants, or Democrats, or whomever, they don't care about repercussions and broken laws and, hell, integrity. First-order thinking is the most they can manage - Bomb 'em all and let god sort 'em out!

It's a damn shame, that these creatures of misinformation and bigotry are given the green light to beat their chests and upend any semblance of decency and cooperation. But that's where we are, unfortunately. Tribal thinking to the extreme, party before country, loyalty over integrity, etc.

Well ... it will turn around late this year, after the voters get their say. Hard to know what The Orange One will do about the lost election, though, or about his impending indictments. When he is a lame-duck President? THAT will be a scary time.
Post 88 IP   flag post
Collector EbaySeller private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedsaid
Meh, the Trumpiots don't care. It has been repeated ad nauseum, in every legitimate news source, that the US did not pay Iran one red cent, that it was just their own funds un-frozen. But Trump doesn't care what's true, and neither do his supporters. It's hardly worth talking about ... these people cannot be reasoned with. Logic and facts don't work on them.


The money is just a symbol, or a composite argument. The payment or return of money is used to make headlines because it's simple and easy to argue in terms that the public can understand. The underlying issue with the Iran Nuclear Agreement is more complex and doesn't fit into headlines or soundbites. The agreement was so singularly focused on the Nuclear Issue that it ignored other realities. Basically it freed up Iran to pursue their regional power ambitions in any way they chose, short of developing nuclear weapons. It put the international community in a position where they would have to abandon the treaty in order to discipline Iran for any bad behavior other than developing a nuclear weapon. Putting sanctions on Iran for other-than-nuclear activities would completely undermine the treaty. Why would Iran continue to respect the treaty if they already had the money back and they were being sanctioned again? It actually put pressure on the rest of the world to resist sanctioning Iran in the future. It was like telling a potential arsonist that they can damage property in any way they chose, and we will ignore it so long as they stop short of lighting a fire.
Post 89 IP   flag post
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
The agreement was so singularly focused on the Nuclear Issue that it ignored other realities. Basically it freed up Iran to pursue their regional power ambitions in any way they chose, short of developing nuclear weapons. It put the international community in a position where they would have to abandon the treaty in order to discipline Iran for any bad behavior other than developing a nuclear weapon.

That is laughably not true. Where are you getting that? Dude, just read the wikipedia article if you want to know what was in the treaty.

"Primary U.S. sanctions, which prohibit U.S. firms from conducting commercial transactions with few exceptions, are not altered by the JCPOA."

and

"All U.S. sanctions against Iran related to alleged human rights abuses, missiles, and support for terrorism are not affected by the agreement and will remain in place."

The list of former ambassadors, State Department personnel, former diplomats, retired military officers, and US scientists - of both parties - who wrote in support of the agreement is astonishingly long. "If properly implemented, this comprehensive and rigorously negotiated agreement can be an effective instrument in arresting Iran's nuclear program and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons in the volatile and vitally important region of the Middle East. In our judgment the [plan] deserves Congressional support and the opportunity to show it can work."
Post 90 IP   flag post
Collector EbaySeller private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedsaid
That is laughably not true. Where are you getting that? Dude, just read the wikipedia article if you want to know what was in the treaty.

"Primary U.S. sanctions, which prohibit U.S. firms from conducting commercial transactions with few exceptions, are not altered by the JCPOA."

and

"All U.S. sanctions against Iran related to alleged human rights abuses, missiles, and support for terrorism are not affected by the agreement and will remain in place."


I'm not saying that new sanctions were not a possibility, I'm saying that they were not a reality. Because once you've returned the money, what is the ongoing compliance Nuclear compliance leverage other than new sanctions?
I've edited my original post, I don't mean to imply that the international community could not impose new sanctions, but rather the Nuclear deal shifts the leverage to Iran's favor by making the community extremely resistant to impose new sanctions. For Nuclear deal reasons, but also for financial reasons.
Post 91 IP   flag post
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedsaid
That is laughably not true. Where are you getting that? Dude, just read the wikipedia article if you want to know what was in the treaty.

"Primary U.S. sanctions, which prohibit U.S. firms from conducting commercial transactions with few exceptions, are not altered by the JCPOA."

and

"All U.S. sanctions against Iran related to alleged human rights abuses, missiles, and support for terrorism are not affected by the agreement and will remain in place."


I'm not saying that new sanctions were not a possibility, I'm saying that they were not a reality. Because once you've returned the money, what is the ongoing compliance Nuclear compliance leverage other than new sanctions?
I've edited my original post, I don't mean to imply that the international community could not impose new sanctions, but rather the Nuclear deal shifts the leverage to Iran's favor by making the community extremely resistant to impose new sanctions. For Nuclear deal reasons, but also for financial reasons.

OH! Okay, I see what you mean.

Well, the sanctions are a lot worse than you are making out, I think. So that's a big difference. The sanctions are crippling, when in full effect. They can't import things from most countries, and can't do business of most any kind with the international community. (Except for a few excluded categories.) This isolation is so severe, the 2008 global recession didn't affect them at all. (But their economy crashed four years later, when more sanctions were imposed based on nuclear development.)

So sanctions are definitely a big deal. But they aren't all-or-nothing, either. So I think it's easy to devise an appropriate response to some transgression, without completely upending the far-reaching nuclear agreement. (Iran agreed to an unprecedented amount of inspections to ensure that they were keeping the agreement.) Iran will still have an incentive to keep the terms, because sanctions can always get much worse. And the global community can respond in the normal way to an antagonistic regime.

Further, allowing Iran to more fully participate in the global economy is a good thing. As things improve, for the country as a whole, and for individual people and companies there, they will be both more connected to other countries and more incentivized to cooperate. That is, the consequences of returning to isolation become more severe over time as their economy grows.
Post 92 IP   flag post
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
I hope I can ask this question without taking things off the rails, but do you truly equate the behavior of the US with the behavior of Iran? Asked another way, do you feel the world would be no worse off if roles were reversed and Iran controlled the worlds largest military arsenal rather than the US?

Well, a hypothetical like this, you have to make certain assumptions. You can't just wave a wand and switch our military with theirs; or switch our economy - which supports our large military - with theirs.

For them to get where we are, militarily, it wouldn't happen all at once. It would be a slow and steady expansion. AND, there would have to be an incentive to expand. First, to become more influential regionally, and later globally, policing their part of the world in large part to protect their economy and markets, and to promote stability.

There is an alternative hypothetical incentive for expansion: conquest. But big countries just don't do that sort of thing anymore. It's too difficult, and destabilizing, and expensive. The only country that has done that lately is Russia. And even then, it was only part of one country that they invaded; and a country that, 30 years ago, was part of the USSR. So they had some measure of local support, and a robust campaign of disinformation and propaganda.

Another thing to consider is the old adage: with great power comes great responsibility. This is absolutely true, but it doesn't just mean one *should* act responsibly ... it also means one *has to* act responsibly. Because one would then shoulder more of the blame for acting irresponsibly.

So a greater power to attack and invade internationally would be coupled with a greater pressure to NOT attack and invade. Look at Pakistan. Before they became a nuclear power, there were all kinds of worst-case scenarios. A Muslim-majority country with a history of regional violence? People were very worried. Especially about the idea of WWIII starting due to conflict with India spiraling out of control.

But look what happened. They DID get nuclear weapons, and then ... nothing. They now HAVE nuclear weapons, but they don't USE nuclear weapons. Same with North Korea, even though their economy and their people are more isolated than any other country in the world.

So, to answer your question, if Iran were in a place to have a much more powerful military, and we had a much less powerful one, then it is likely that they would behave better than they are now and we - out of desperation and a sense of powerlessness - would likely behave worse. That's just what happens on a global scale. (Note how Russia has gotten much worse the last couple of decades, as their global power has faded. They used to be one of two "superpowers." But no more. So now they now promote destabilizing policies and actions around the globe, just to remain relevant.)
Post 93 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
One takeaway from all this that I think is important is that within our country we have people with access to libraries, the internet, public television and dozens of other informational sources.
Mis-information and outright placement of extremist types of news phissing are hardly anything new, especially these days under an administration that mines "daily Enquirer" and "Breitbart" for news and information....or alternative facts as they have come to be known.

Our society seems to be fostering and building a segment that wil take any sound byte, any piece of information that conforms to their assigned bias' and begin repeating it as fact without any effort to verify it, any systemic action to determine if its factual, and an utter and complete inability to apply higher logic, reason or decision making in the process. Even more frightening is the failure to logic given hands...and taking action...voting, voicing support for arbitrary and poorly considered acts
If this trend continues we risk becoming similar to Iran, denying the shoot down until the evidence becomes overwhelming and beyond deniability. I am surprised at this stage it hasn't been advanced that of course the airliner was shot down, by a black ops military operation to attempt to draw blame to Iran and discredit their administration, entirely conceived by Mr trump himself in a stroke of utter genius.It was likely later determined the plane served as a forward post for the collection of information used to target members of the current administration for liberal smear campaigns.
Post 94 IP   flag post
Collector poka private msg quote post Address this user
@Tedsaid there is religion(s) of difference between India and Iran.
Post 95 IP   flag post
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by poka
@Tedsaid there is religion(s) of difference between India and Iran.

I'm sorry, poka, I'm not following. Did you mean Pakistan? And the different flavors of Islam between that found in Pakistan vs. Iran?

I used that as an example of a country that became a nuclear power, one that a lot of people were worried about. I wasn't trying to say that Pakistan is a lot like Iran.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
Our society seems to be fostering and building a segment that wil take any sound byte, any piece of information that conforms to their assigned bias' and begin repeating it as fact without any effort to verify it, any systemic action to determine if its factual, and an utter and complete inability to apply higher logic, reason or decision making in the process.

THIS. Absolutely true ... I call them the "willfully ignorant." They do it so they have some semblance of an excuse to rationalize their feelings.
Post 96 IP   flag post
Collector poka private msg quote post Address this user
@Tedsaid yes sorry meant pakistan and yes there is a religion in difference between. pakistan and iran - goes back to the sunni vs shia
Post 97 IP   flag post
Collector EbaySeller private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedsaid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
Our society seems to be fostering and building a segment that wil take any sound byte, any piece of information that conforms to their assigned bias' and begin repeating it as fact without any effort to verify it, any systemic action to determine if its factual, and an utter and complete inability to apply higher logic, reason or decision making in the process.

THIS. Absolutely true ... I call them the "willfully ignorant." They do it so they have some semblance of an excuse to rationalize their feelings.


When people chose their news sources they are actually choosing their filter. The "News Media" is as for-profit as any other source of entertainment and should be recognized as such. It is tailored to persuade and reinforce a willing audience. People who watch "leftist" media will actually receive factual information and more-or-less factual explanations that "rightist" media will chose not to reveal, and vice-versa. But make no mistake, we chose this based on what gives us comfort.

Because the truth is, as the world has become smaller we have, at the highest level, divided into 2 Tribes. The two tribes are Globalist and Nationalist, and all educated people fall into one tribe or the other. And the truth is there are many good and pure motivations for being in either tribe, lord knows I've been in both Tribes at some time or other in my life. Now if one allows themselves to become convinced that their Tribe is all pure and the other Tribe is motivated by evil and hate-filled hearts...well how very Tribal of us. If one is convinced that the others are Tribal, but not those who think like me...again, how very tribal. If one is convinced that the others watch fake news but I seek out pure unfiltered truth, again...very tribal. If one takes comfort by turning to their highly-filtered media choice and hearing the same drumbeat over and over and over and over again every hour of every day...definitely Tribal.

Edit: I daresay the world would be a better and friendlier place if we all just recognized and admitted our Tribal allegiance. And instead of impugning the integrity and motivations of the other Tribe (leave that to the Politicians), just state our best arguments for why we chose to be in the Tribe we are in.
Post 98 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
The problem I see with your base argument is the idea an intelligent person would choose one source or another and therefore lemming behavior

Why not take the time and effort to multi source your news through multiple filters and in doing so find the kernels of truth imbedded

Albert Einstein has been quoted although possibly inaccurately as offering that intelligence is the ability to entertain as many conflicting viewpoints as possible on any give discussion .
I read it all then use logic and higher reason to sort the manipulation from the evidenced fact ..it takes longer and requires mental discipline but being mentally lazy is as unappealing as being physically so
Post 99 IP   flag post
Collector EbaySeller private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
The problem I see with your base argument is the idea an intelligent person would choose one source or another and therefore lemming behavior


Not lemming behavior, just simple people seeking comfort in an increasingly complicated world. But either way, why is that a problem with my base argument?
Post 100 IP   flag post
Collector poka private msg quote post Address this user
There are 3 things which causes all issues in the world

Money, envy and politics/religion
Post 101 IP   flag post
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
If one is convinced that the others are Tribal, but not those who think like me...again, how very tribal. If one is convinced that the others watch fake news but I seek out pure unfiltered truth, again...very tribal.

Hmmm ... I see two problems with your arguments.

First of all, let's dispense with the (perhaps implied?) false equivalency, okay? Sure, both sides are partially responsible for, say, polarization in politics. Is it equal? No, not even close.

Donald Trump lies more than any President in 100 years, perhaps ever. Next to him, Nixon and Reagan and Clinton were wellsprings of truth. Sure, every President exaggerates and spins and dissembles. Does every President outright lie on a daily basis? No. In fact, I would submit that it's never happened before. There simply is no equivalency here.

Putting party before country ... do both sides do it? Sure. Does one take it to an extreme? Absolutely. The Republicans are upending norms and attacking democracy's foundations like we haven't seen in decades. It's a problem, when one side will not only do anything to win, but when they also believe such behavior is justified. Just look at the wholly fictional story about voter fraud, and how prevalent it has become. It is demonstrable nonsense, of course ... just an excuse to prevent millions of Democrats from voting. And just one piece of a large pattern of egregious behavior.

Biased and fraudulent news ... does everyone have a bias? Sure. Does every news channel, paper, and magazine make mistakes? Yes, they do. Is there one mainstream news source that proudly and purposefully promotes a bias, distorting reality unlike anyone else? Oh, absolutely. Fox News has become a propaganda channel, and they do it to both make money and support an agenda (two things that are inexorably tied together). They do it by design. No other mainstream news source is like that. And, frankly, it is silly when some people try to pretend otherwise.

Anyway, here is just one small piece of evidence for the above. It's a 10-minute video, with sources and research to back it.

The second issue is this idea you are promoting about how everyone is in a tribe. Again, there is a distinct hint of false equivalency here. You seem to be saying that, regardless of what issue the two sides disagree on, they are both "tribal" in the same way, and therefore both falling for the same fallacies.

Well. Sometimes one side IS right, and the other side IS wrong. There may be two sides to slavery, for example, but I have no problem pointing to the pro-slavery crowd and saying - correctly - that they are assholes.

I do have one more quibble.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
The "News Media" is as for-profit as any other source of entertainment and should be recognized as such.


This is not true. Newspapers and reporters are situated in an environment with a broad and deep tradition of journalistic ethics. Some hold to these ethics very well, and some almost never, but the tradition of ethics is there. There are disagreements in some areas, too. Is one source enough, or do you need at least two? Should you pay for an interview, for a story? And, importantly, should you strive to report what is true? Or do other considerations weigh more?

No other field of entertainment has this. Sure, they want to sell papers and ads and stay in business. But that's not why they do it, most of them. They do it in order to report the truth, to publicize important stories, to "shine a light on corruption." The money is a means to an end, not the end itself.

So, when you talk about the news media being just like any other entertainment, it sounds like you are trying to excuse Fox News (and similar propagandists) by again implying that "everybody does it." No, they don't. Most people in the mainstream news business try very hard to get it right and not be biased. It's a shame that they don't all do this. But no need to pretend there isn't one that is head-and-shoulders worse than the rest.
Post 102 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by poka
There are 3 things which causes all issues in the world

Money, envy and politics/religion
Sort of..but its more basic than that...money can be gold , silver, wealth and riches, which implies greed....as for other causes, envy....sure envy causes a lot of issues, but its right in bed with greed as a partner .Politics is simply a method of negotiation to express that greed, or fear, or envy or religion and nothing more..it is a method not a cause.
If you truly wanted to wave a wand and highlight the three worst causes for world issues the all time leader is ignorance.
Ignorance prevents the family in one third world country from being able to know how to dig and build a well while they do without water to then plant a garden so they do not starve. Ignorance allows people in our own country to believe in things like 150 billion dollar cash drops and other such inventions.

The 2nd cause is fear...fear of losing your home, your loved ones, your way of life, or just your country to another race with a different color or language. Fear of a country with a bigger army or more technology or a better navy.
The third cause is religion, which you nailed perfectly. We have lost more riches, time, knowledge, science, and ability to prosper and advance to religion than any other single destructive force. Two thousand years later here sits mankind on a planet almost destroyed by their own wealth, laziness and greed while each side sits and argues about which one told the best stories in a cave 2,000 years ago while siping cactus juice and being frightened because the sun had disappeared and it was cold outside.
Rather than being out in the stars, building other world cpolonies and mining the riches of our solar system, here we sit.
Post 103 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
The problem I see with your base argument is the idea an intelligent person would choose one source or another and therefore lemming behavior


Not lemming behavior, just simple people seeking comfort in an increasingly complicated world. But either way, why is that a problem with my base argument?
Judging by your post its almost impossible that you read mine and did not understand.
Your point you made was people choose the right or left, but they choose a filter and follow it.
Mine was and remains....that is the entire issue itself that conflicts with intelligent thinking …..thinking someone must choose and then follow that tribes beliefs. Lemming behavior...
As I demonstrated the intelligent mind reviews all sources, left , right, the middle and builds a determination based on ALL the evidence, all the facts and all the information.

When you watch a court case, both the prosecution and defense are given adequate space and time to present all pertinent witnesses, evidence and facts, after which a decision is rendered.

Tribalism is nothing more than trying to argue the prosecution or defense if you like is always correct.



A very long time ago I was sitting and sorting a large frame of eggshells. Dinosaur eggshells to be precise..these had all been gathered in a one square mile area of the Gobi....as I sorted I first tried to use color as my basis. The man who was helping me, a now famous paleontologist explained the colors are based on minerals in the ground around the burial and have no bearing on the shell itself. …..but without complete information I had been making bad decisions. SO I mixed them back up in the tray and began sorting based on....since you could not use size, or even color, how about thickness?
Around he came again and explained that often when an egg laying animal is stressed they will double shell an egg and voila...ugh...again without complete information I had erred.
Then I noticed it...each piece had patterning on the outer side, which we call ornamentation. This patterning prevents the egg from being easily covered with mud and prevents blockage of the pores of the shell to allow the animal inside to release by products, and filter in oxygen and water . And..more startling, each species has over the years developed its own ornamentation patterning ……
I felt I had discovered Atlantis itself, looking through the tray but then I realized there must be forty species of dinosaur represented in my tray. I asked if we could attempt to assign species to these shells, to simplify matters.
the answer was quite simple...no you cannot identify eggshells by their pattern similarities to other eggs because...that assumes that you have already discoved all the possible animals that could have laid all these eggs, which is not known nor assumable. The only direct method of speciating the eggs was to find an intact egg with a chick fossilized inside, with bones that could be assembled and identified to a particular species.
You could make size, shape and even pattern similarity comparisons...but with missing information you cannot make a firm identification.

In todays world it seems like people are constantly erring in having that same incomplete information spectrum....and choosing either left or right, only further heightens the problems, because neither offers it all...you have to absorb it all, then filter, and find the matching patterns as it were.
Post 104 IP   flag post
318004 104 29
Thread locked. No more posts permitted. Return home.