Although unlike most Bernie Sanders supporters the dude wandered around in public performing Nazi salutes so yeah.
Far be it from me to let facts get in the way of the narrative.
But if you take the time to actually look at his account.
His motives are pretty clear considering from where he shared pictures of his own little stunt from and what it says. A stunt which he was kicked out for, by the way.
So lets take a look at the facts.
In his facebook statement that you posted, he claimed to support Sanders because of Sanders policy of 'end the prison and military industrial complexes.'
Coming from an excriminal who has probably spent time in one such institute, it wouldn't be surprising for him to support this one issue that Sanders put forward. It might actually be hos most important policy, although, if he is mentally ill, I'd personally be surprised if he knew exactly what Sanders meant with that type of statement.
That does not mean he supports other Sanders or democratic party policies, just that one and if he had the choice, he'd choose Sanders over Clinton because of this one issue.
Most of his other actions and statements support the far right in politics however. Cherry picking posts from this individual and ignoring the root of why he posted it, doesnt make him something different.
maybe terror shouldn't be the thing we are going to war against. Perhaps we should be focusing our time and energy on helping the mentally ill so they are not persuaded to do these heinous acts.
Mentally ill people are significantly more likely to be victims of violence than they are perpetrators of it. It's popular to scapegoat mental illness as the cause of this kind of violence, especially by straight white guys, but I don't think that in the majority of cases this is actually established. It is simply assumed.
Although unlike most Bernie Sanders supporters the dude wandered around in public performing Nazi salutes so yeah.
Far be it from me to let facts get in the way of the narrative.
But if you take the time to actually look at his account.
His motives are pretty clear considering from where he shared pictures of his own little stunt from and what it says. A stunt which he was kicked out for, by the way.
It's not a narrative. He was literally photographed doing that.
maybe terror shouldn't be the thing we are going to war against. Perhaps we should be focusing our time and energy on helping the mentally ill so they are not persuaded to do these heinous acts.
Mentally ill people are significantly more likely to be victims of violence than they are perpetrators of it. It's popular to scapegoat mental illness as the cause of this kind of violence, especially by straight white guys, but I don't think that in the majority of cases this is actually established. It is simply assumed.
Straight white guys is a first. This argument is usually brought up by socialist and humanist and it isnt a escape goat.
It is also going to hard for me to phrase, but the mentally ill are usually recruited by terrorist organizations because they are easy to manipulate and expendable. They are usually looking for acceptance since they do not get it, or feel like they do not get it in other areas of their life.
When a mentally ill person does commit a crime like the stabbing, the warning signs for violent outburst were there, but ignored. The illness went untreated because of either cost, ignorance or the social unacceptace of one suffering from such an illness.
This social unacceptace is what leads to the mentally ill from being victims of harassment and violence themselves.
Treating the mentally ill and having a more acceptable approach (love everyone) to them in society can curb some (but not all) of these incidents.
Well, actually, yes, when white terrorists commit acts of violence, the media does go out of their way to portray them as sympathetically as possible. The terms "lone-wolf" and "mentally ill" are constantly bandied about, almost as an excuse for the behavior. No one ever asks or refers to Muslims who commit terrorist acts by using these two terms.
@BelleSorciere is right. Blaming mental illness is simply a way to make the rest of us feel better about the situation, and allow us not to do anything. Not that this country has been serious about taking care of the mentally-ill in recent memory anyway, certainly since Reagan slashed funding for it in the '80s. Most people want them out of sight and out of mind unless they are in the immediate family. But one need only look at the string of incidents in the last few years where parents or caregivers called the cops to help them with their child or charge having an incident and the cops end up SHOOTING them instead of actually helping.
If we use the blanket excuse of mental illness, that allows us not to have to talk about racism, guns, poverty, social alienation perpetuated by the dark corners of the internet, or any number of other issues. We're more than happy to tar and scapegoat those with actual illnesses to make excuses for the perpetrator, but, in all honestly, we're just making excuses for ourselves and how we refuse to deal with hard issues.
@jjstraka34 The media also does not have a good understanding with the classification of terrorism, esp. 'lone wolf', there are actually three different classifications regarding this term, and how each is motivated.
Mentally ill is definitely screwed up and as mentioned before,STILL put on the back burner.
Unfortunately, oftentimes the treatment for mental illness is medication that the person may or may not want to take. Unless we're willing to force people to take medication or lock them up in institutions like they did in the past, what exactly does 'helping' them involve?
Unfortunately, oftentimes the treatment for mental illness is medication that the person may or may not want to take. Unless we're willing to force people to take medication or lock them up in institutions like they did in the past, what exactly does 'helping' them involve?
It's a tough issue. Most GP's don't know much about it, and push anti depressants for bout ANYTHING. Plus funding and places is a bit sparse as well, esp. in the Appalachian region here. I would say in general, and depending on the next healthcare bill disaster, more knowledge and cooperation from healthcare providers. MUCH better mental health related conflict training for police would be a big help as well. Too many examples of police interaction gone wrong, not just from reading but first hand where I lived.
Many states still do not even report all incidents to the FBI database as required to be able to have at least halfway decent records, as far as the gun component goes.
I agree though, it is not a one step solution (many think it is) and I sure don't have all the answers, but just want to see things improved, on a variety of lvls.
Even then, I don't believe for an instant everything can be erradicated with so MANY issues. Some in the political arena in DC sure act like it can though, the jackwagons.
This right here is what I'm referring to @BelleSorciere , talking to down to people and being condescending, because they are different than you, not quite as accepting and tolerant as claimed, eh?
You caught us. All right wingers are racist. We believe in laws only for brown people. Yup. Really hateful over here.
It's amazing that the left gets away with so flippantly abusing abhorrent accusations like that, frankly. As if they have free reign to slander anyone and everyone they don't like.
We don't think you are all racists we think you all are misguided by supporting the side with the racist agendas. True, some of you are deplorables, not all. Even if you personally are not racist, are you proud to share the side with racists? It's kind of like how your side attacks all islam when only some are "radical islamic terrorists" when all islamic people are not like that.
But there's more wrong on the right than just the racism. Here's some other things the left doesn't like about the right: Supply side economics Intolerance for anyone not straight white christian Desires to gut people's education and or christianize it Desires to ruin the environment for business Want to make poor people's lives worse Corporations over people
Yup, lets keep generalizing and talking down to people who are different than you. Methinks the kettle doth protest too much.
But its okay right? Because clearly this justifies everything
Heard an interesting conspiracy theory today. That the Tory manifesto is to put off people voting for them so they vote Labour then Labour have to deal with the Brexit negotiations then if it goes wrong the Tory party can swoop in with the criticism and ride in on the white horse in the next general election.
This right here is what I'm referring to @BelleSorciere , talking to down to people and being condescending, because they are different than you, not quite as accepting and tolerant as claimed, eh?
I already pointed out how this argument is a fallacy earlier in the thread and you invoke it as if it's a trump card.
The paradox of tolerance. Being "accepting and tolerant" does not mean "being accepting and tolerant of intolerance." That's not even a gotcha, it's just a bad argument.
Also, you're either trying to impose an agenda on me or assuming that I have an agenda I do not have. I am not interested in converting deplorables to my views. Their views are already abhorrent, and I can't imagine that anything I would do or say would change their views, even if they don't immediately view me as discreditable because of who I am, and may indeed hate me because of who I am.
But for some reason I'm the problem and not the haters because I am unwilling to sugarcoat the fact that the haters are indeed haters. That I'm talking down to them because I refuse to view them with charity or kindness.
I think it is calling them names, such as deplorable that gives the argument a holier than thou, your opinion will never matter, that Thaco is rallying against.
My grandmother was practically a saint, yet she had racist tendencies due to her upbringing. She did more good in her life and I wouldn't call her deplorable because of some misguided views.
Painting everyone with the same brush, saying that their gripes and concerns do not matter when it comes to electing a government and their choice is wrong because of X does not help and just entrenches everyone in their own beliefs.
Things aren't black and white, yet people treat them as that. There is middle ground. Everyone moving there is better for a society as a whole.
I think the problem here is that non-racist people are afraid that they'll get accused of being racist in the process.
In the U.S. at least, racist is one of the worst things you can possibly be. When accusations of racism start flying, people worry about getting caught in the crossfire.
I think it is calling them names, such as deplorable that gives the argument a holier than thou, your opinion will never matter, that Thaco is rallying against.
My grandmother was practically a saint, yet she had racist tendencies due to her upbringing. She did more good in her life and I wouldn't call her deplorable because of some misguided views.
Painting everyone with the same brush, saying that their gripes and concerns do not matter when it comes to electing a government and their choice is wrong because of X does not help and just entrenches everyone in their own beliefs.
Things aren't black and white, yet people treat them as that. There is middle ground. Everyone moving there is better for a society as a whole.
I am talking about literal Nazis. People who got together in Washington DC after the election to shout "Heil Trump!" and make Nazi salutes during a speech by Richard Spencer. I am talking about people who are (or at least were) harassing Tanya Gersh and her family. The guys who disrupted Shia LeBeouf's art installation to chant Nazi slogans or memes or whatever. There are a lot of people on the right who like this and I don't care what they think about what I say about them.
And yes I will paint them all with the same brush, as deplorable and awful as they are.
And I am sorry if you or anyone else is anxious that you'll be accused of racism or misogyny or anything else, but I'm not responsible for that, and I'm not going to take that fear into account.
I think the problem here is that non-racist people are afraid that they'll get accused of being racist in the process.
In the U.S. at least, racist is one of the worst things you can possibly be. When accusations of racism start flying, people worry about getting caught in the crossfire.
Pretty much everyone is racist to some extent, so it's not so much that being racist is one of the worst things you can possibly be. It's the idea that being racist makes one a bad person that brings up this fear of being identified as a racist.
But most people aren't bad people and are still racist. And because people are unwilling to own their problems, talking about it gets into this circular nonsense about how unfair or wrong it is or how people are being talked down to.
But I was talking about Nazis, basically. I am not sure I feel about having to spell that out but since people kept lecturing me on how they didn't like it that I was calling anyone racist, I guess it was necessary. TBH I think it should have been obvious. But people were too fixated on the idea that it's important to be ~nice~ to people like that because you might be able to change their minds (you'll never change their minds).
I think it is calling them names, such as deplorable that gives the argument a holier than thou, your opinion will never matter, that Thaco is rallying against.
My grandmother was practically a saint, yet she had racist tendencies due to her upbringing. She did more good in her life and I wouldn't call her deplorable because of some misguided views.
Painting everyone with the same brush, saying that their gripes and concerns do not matter when it comes to electing a government and their choice is wrong because of X does not help and just entrenches everyone in their own beliefs.
Things aren't black and white, yet people treat them as that. There is middle ground. Everyone moving there is better for a society as a whole.
I am talking about literal Nazis. People who got together in Washington DC after the election to shout "Heil Trump!" and make Nazi salutes during a speech by Richard Spencer. I am talking about people who are (or at least were) harassing Tanya Gersh and her family. The guys who disrupted Shia LeBeouf's art installation to chant Nazi slogans or memes or whatever. There are a lot of people on the right who like this and I don't care what they think about what I say about them.
And yes I will paint them all with the same brush, as deplorable and awful as they are.
And I am sorry if you or anyone else is anxious that you'll be accused of racism or misogyny or anything else, but I'm not responsible for that, and I'm not going to take that fear into account.
Fair enough, but this isn't everyone on the right.
Just because this type of group supports Trump, doesnt mean everyone who supports Trump are like them.
You probably cant even say a vast majority of people who support trump are like this.
I think it is calling them names, such as deplorable that gives the argument a holier than thou, your opinion will never matter, that Thaco is rallying against.
My grandmother was practically a saint, yet she had racist tendencies due to her upbringing. She did more good in her life and I wouldn't call her deplorable because of some misguided views.
Painting everyone with the same brush, saying that their gripes and concerns do not matter when it comes to electing a government and their choice is wrong because of X does not help and just entrenches everyone in their own beliefs.
Things aren't black and white, yet people treat them as that. There is middle ground. Everyone moving there is better for a society as a whole.
I am talking about literal Nazis. People who got together in Washington DC after the election to shout "Heil Trump!" and make Nazi salutes during a speech by Richard Spencer. I am talking about people who are (or at least were) harassing Tanya Gersh and her family. The guys who disrupted Shia LeBeouf's art installation to chant Nazi slogans or memes or whatever. There are a lot of people on the right who like this and I don't care what they think about what I say about them.
And yes I will paint them all with the same brush, as deplorable and awful as they are.
And I am sorry if you or anyone else is anxious that you'll be accused of racism or misogyny or anything else, but I'm not responsible for that, and I'm not going to take that fear into account.
Fair enough, but this isn't everyone on the right.
Just because this type of group supports Trump, doesnt mean everyone who supports Trump are like them.
You probably cant even say a vast majority of people who support trump are like this.
I literally said this isn't everyone on the right earlier in the thread. I even specifically agreed that the people on this forum aren't like this (although some were like this during the whole Siege of Dragonspear ~controversy~, they left shortly thereafter).
I never said everyone who supports trump is like this.
@BelleSorciere Except that you did call every single person on the right those things. "We don't think you are all racists we think you all are misguided by supporting the side with the racist agendas. True, some of you are deplorables, not all. Even if you personally are not racist, are you proud to share the side with racists? It's kind of like how your side attacks all islam when only some are "radical islamic terrorists" when all islamic people are not like that.
But there's more wrong on the right than just the racism. Here's some other things the left doesn't like about the right: Supply side economics Intolerance for anyone not straight white christian Desires to gut people's education and or christianize it Desires to ruin the environment for business Want to make poor people's lives worse Corporations over people"
This looks like a laundry list for a comic book villain, not a group of actual people. I don't stand for people harassing and discriminating people for their race, religion, gender, etc. and I sure as heck won't stand for it based on politics. When I see crap like this, I am sure as heck going to call it out.
Pretty much everyone is racist to some extent, so it's not so much that being racist is one of the worst things you can possibly be. It's the idea that being racist makes one a bad person that brings up this fear of being identified as a racist.
A study using a dating app was conducted a few years ago; its results confirm your claim. When the chips are down--stressful situations only, not everyday life--every human being defaults to preferring other human beings who look like them on the outside...except in the cases of mass tragedy, in which case everyone is treated equally and we all try to help each other. Unfortunately, this is hard-wired into our brain and no amount of open-mindedness or sensitivity training can overcome it.
The truth of the matter is that the amount of genetic variation from group A to group B is so small that we really shouldn't refer to different groups of humans as "races" but "breeds" like we do for dogs. Backtracking the rate of mitochondrial DNA mutation, researchers have evidence that points to a "genetic bottleneck" which happened about 75,000 years ago--every human being alive today is a distant descendant of the same small group.
Far too many people throw around the label "racist" these days for things which are not racist. Strangely, many people also think that racism flows in one direction only, from white towards black. Consider the Congressional Black Caucus, whose official policy does not cite skin color as a prerequisite to join; however, if you aren't black then they won't let you in, period. That clearly meets the definition of "racism"--negative discrimination towards people based on skin color.
Finally, just for the sake of argument let us presume that somehow every person in the world was converted so that we all have exactly the same skin color and facial structure. It would take only a few weeks for us to figure out new ways to separate ourselves into groups and we would begin discriminating against each other on that basis. We are all Sneetches.
12% of all adults in the United States had 5 or more chronic health conditions; 60% of all adults have at least one
the most common chronic disorders were (ranked by prevalence): hypertension (high blood pressure), lipid disorders (cholesterol), mood disorders, diabetes mellitus, anxiety disorders, upper respiratory disorders, inflammatory joint disorders other than arthritis, osteoarthritis, asthma, coronary atherosclerosis (heart disease)
the 12% of adults with 5+ chronic conditions account for 41% of all medical spending
if we add in adults with 3+ chronic conditions (a total of 28%) they account for 67% of all medical spending
adults with 0 chronic conditions spent an average of about $1300 each year on medical expenses but...
adults with 5+ chronic conditions spent an average of $18,250 each year on medical expenses; the largest categories of spending in this category were on inpatient care, office/outpatient care, and prescription medication
*************
This study is not designed to influence or direct what sort of health care coverage plan we should have, whether we go back to pre-ACA days, keep the ACA as it currently exists, use whatever plan passes Congress (if a plan passes Congress), or set up an entirely different structure. Rather, this study serves only to identify who spends more (which should be pretty obvious) and how much more they spend as compared to people with fewer long-term health problems.
One thing we can definitely take from this report is that a little preventive medicine saves a lot of money. Under some circumstances, high blood pressure and cholesterol problems may be avoided by proper diet and exercise. Yes, I am aware that sometimes genetics play a factor, which is why I said "some circumstances".
Interestingly, for both men and women the prevalence of mood/anxiety disorders increased from 2008 to 2014. I am uncertain whether this is due to better diagnoses, doctors pushing pills onto people, or a combination of the two. *shrug* Probably a topic for a different thread altogether, though.
@Mathsorcerer I thought you put that quite nicely regarding race. I have very similar thoughts. And as you alluded to I think, and I'll go even a little further,by saying the term racism can be thought of in a different context in the minds of each person in a conversation, so without defining the term in detail we can often be a cross purposes without even realizing it. Harder even still over the net. I am fairly certain if given the right setting, in person, the conversation would go a little better.
My thoughts as I've been the dutiful listener, mostly.
On a lighter note, I never liked the term race as a descriptor after being exposed to D&D at a very young age. I used to think ' wait a minute, so these other ppl in the world are just human, with more or less just different skin color? How is that a race' I used to think different would be like an elf or dwarf or something for pete's sake, or neanderthal in RL. Anyway.
Shoot, as a southerner I've been called 'cracka' by white folk. Used to laugh and say 'NC, not GA, it's Tar Heel- at least get your location right if your gonna insult me ppl', 'hillbilly' by New Yorkers, redneck and country by city folk. I have to laugh a little because it is almost ludicrous to hear these days, but really, just shows that divides exist and probably always will do to that hard wiring, even if just to a certain extent. So ppl even discriminate again there own 'race'. Ppl see differences, as mentioned, and some just react in a less than thoughtful or fair way.
The way in which we interact with others is the more important bit, IMO.
I am actually glad the whole race issue is getting out in the open again, it's been the elephant in the corner that ppl (white folks mostly) think is invisible these days. Well, the spell is wearing off, it's time to start talking about it again, in a decent manner would be nice.
With more people retiring now, due to the baby boomers generation, ageism is cropping up big time in my opinion (and personal experience).
We even have laws vs ageism, but that doesn't make age discrimination stop, now company's just use overqualified or some crap like that to get around it. Ppl sometimes see an older person and think 'Different'. Anyone guilty of that?
Ppl see me, a traumatic burn 'survivor'(don't like that term but there it is), and think "different' and stare sometimes. One CAN'T help but notice differences. Heck, I even notice, just more likely with greater empathy than the 'unburned or unscarred', but ppl with traumatic injuries of any sort often do with another. Anyone guilty of that? And yes, it hurts sometimes, ya get used to it but it doesn't disappear, I'll admit. Tell ppl I'm a TI diabetic ' oh, you poor thing' Poor what?
Just that the outside gets noticed more, all I am saying. Ppl DO look and sound different. If someone calls that racist, then so be it.
Pure racism as it is most commonly thought of, is DEFINITELY alive and functioning, not only in the south, but in many places around the world, in one form or another.
Dang, why did I even write this, maybe because just about everything gets pulled into politics these days. Oh well, there it is, and here I am (I think).
I don't care for the hard right, I don't care for the hard left, heck, I don't care about the middle alot of the time. I mostly just get tired of being meddled with by all sides, and the gov'ment in particular likes to meddle just a hair too much at times me thinks.
I sometimes refer to states as the 'stationary bandit lords', as opposed to rule before 'laws' being the 'roving bandit lords'. Now the rovers were at least up front and would kill or steal out in the open for whatever. at least one could expect it comin (mostly). The 'stationary', however, is a lot sneakier, and likes to use taxes & laws in such instead of stealin n killin (even THAT is gettin a little iffy these days). Harder to see but I guess somewhat less of a chaotic affair and more peaceful I suppose. But still, we traded one for another in a way, not necessarily all bad of course.
Now, there's a nice long post worthy of any powergamer's Shoot, I'm punchin the button anyway, just gonna throw it out there and say 'go fish', like the ol card game. Where's my 'thrown rubber chicken blockin shield'?
@Mathsorcerer I'll double post your double post to keep it separate as well
As to the health issue. Were gonna be outa luck until costs get controlled, and I'm talkin drug and service costs here, that doesn't even address the insurance costs. Shoot, I even caught one doctor by use of tactics admitting that he could raise the price of a $10 injection to $300 cause his insurance company TOLD him to, to make more money. Doctors are so stressed out over the sheer mass of paperwork (computer records) they have less time to spend with a patient these days. Drug companies, combined with insurance companies can make a real killin, when done right(wrong)
AS to chronic conditions, heck yeah it saves to be proactive. Doctor Hotspot is a good example of this that Frontline did a while back. As to 2008, people started losing jobs, being foreclosed on, becoming homeless, divorces from money issues, Economy had a good deal to do with it. I LIVED that crap and saw how it affected people. And of Anti-depressants are the go-to for most mental issues as GP's know very little about the mental aspect (some do). We also have the biggest generation in history now retiring and living longer than ever before. Chronic conditions can definitely increase with age, Alzheimers in particular. And with drugs to stay alive, companies can have a real cash crop there. The US is getting close, and will be there soon as regard the older folks vs newborns. Folks from south of the border are the youngest group and keeping the US age down a little.
Drug companies push their newest and 'bestest' products when older things still work fine. T2 Diabetes is just a breeding ground for keeping them in business and NOT finding cures. I ain't even gettin into my own T1. Insulin aught to be the price of a soft drink by now. But there is just NO long term company money in fixin diabetes. Health care industry, not a system, is what we have here, one of the last holdouts in the world. Now even insurance companies are leaving areas.
We just had a hospital here in the mountains that is getting rid of labor and delivery because the population is older and more poorer folk are the ones having more kids, and can't afford the high cost. NC opted out of the medicaid expansion(rightly or wrongly) so there is as not much to fund profit making hospitals.
And all most politicians go on about his the dadgum insurance companies and the right plan for people to shack up with. Like THAT'S gonna help REALLY help health costs that much.
When ppl are MADE to buy some kinda 'insurance', of course, insurance is gonna go up after a while. 'Yeah, yeah, they GOT to buys our stuff now Bubba, lets raise prices. Let's join into big insurance conglomerates as well. Were gonna make Ma Bell look like a Mr Rodgers show'.
Health IS tied into politics, and in a big way. School menus(funding), food choices (funding), drug advertising, food advertising, computer sit on the butt age, care for the older generation, low cost housing availability, etc. etc. To top that off, many in power are listening to the wrong ppl for the right solutions to try and make things better. This could go on and on but will leave it at that.
Anyone here visited a food bank on a regular basis in their life? If you have you now the poor make choices of food not because they are dumb, but because they don't have the money and are seriously stresed about life and how just to make it another week.
Yeah, I'm a little bugged at this countries approach to public and private health. It is both a political and economic hot mess.
And I don't mind voicing this from an earlier background in public health education. ACA looked like a recipe for an insurance nightmare when I actually SAW in my head what was gonna happen. The new GOP bill doesn't even seem to address as much as that did and if focusing basically on Ins. companies, will not do a whole darn lot. Will see.
Ain't health capitalism just great?
Whewwww. I gotta get some hobgoblins or something in BG after THAT. Maybe I could find some in DC, sure are enough politicians acting like some.
Now back to your regularly schedule program of terrorism, trumpism, democratism, and republicanism, racism, and, er, gotta be another ism here somewhere. MAybe me, grandstandism on a soapbox.
EDIT: Politics and healthcare industry talkin gets me ta needin coffee and chocolate eatin'.
You caught us. All right wingers are racist. We believe in laws only for brown people. Yup. Really hateful over here.
It's amazing that the left gets away with so flippantly abusing abhorrent accusations like that, frankly. As if they have free reign to slander anyone and everyone they don't like.
We don't think you are all racists we think you all are misguided by supporting the side with the racist agendas. True, some of you are deplorables, not all. Even if you personally are not racist, are you proud to share the side with racists? It's kind of like how your side attacks all islam when only some are "radical islamic terrorists" when all islamic people are not like that.
But there's more wrong on the right than just the racism. Here's some other things the left doesn't like about the right: Supply side economics Intolerance for anyone not straight white christian Desires to gut people's education and or christianize it Desires to ruin the environment for business Want to make poor people's lives worse Corporations over people
North Korea is poised to achieve the ability to strike the west coast of the United States by 2020, the end of Trump's first term.
I do not see a way to resolve the nuclear issue without a peace treaty or a war. We have been pursuing a middle road, neither making peace with the North Koreans nor invading them, for decades. We have avoided a shooting war with the North, but we are also no closer to peace than the day the Korean War ended. And it only takes one warmonger, zealot, or idiot on one side of a conflict to start a war.
Such is the nature of war. You have years and years and years of tense peace in which people don't trust each other, but aren't actually fighting. Then one thing changes, and over the course of mere weeks or months, a war begins.
A forest stands for 10 years. It catches fire in 10 minutes. Plenty of people will have known it was coming. But nobody knew how or when.
The Trump administration isn't going to do anything. It's already preoccupied with all the other goals it's struggling to accomplish. If North Korea pops up in the news enough, the most we will see from the administration is a solitary token gesture that doesn't change the facts on the ground.
And then nothing else. Just like that one token strike on Syria, in which the targets got back to their normal jobs in less than 24 hours after the strike. The Syrian civil war continues unabated. Assad has no reason to fear Trump any more than he did Obama. Assad's calculus hasn't changed; therefore his behavior won't change.
The Chinese will continue to make empty calls for restraint while doing nothing to address the problem. Japan will do nothing; it doesn't have the power to help. South Korea might make overtures to the North, but the North will ignore them. South Korea might threaten the North, but the North will respond in kind.
North Korea will not stop even when it has the ability to strike the United States. A state's need for security is an insatiable hunger; no amount of deterrence and no amount of raw power will ever be enough. The United States and Russia had (and still have) the ability to destroy each other and the world several times over, but that did not end the arms race on either side. Even if the odds of a war with the United States drops to zero--not just one in a million, but flat-out zero--the North Koreans will keep building their capacity to hurt other people. Even if the North is just trying to defend itself, it won't matter. They won't stop.
There is only one thing that ever seems to change in this conflict: the North's ability to cause harm. And it only goes in one direction.
North Korea is poised to achieve the ability to strike the west coast of the United States by 2020, the end of Trump's first term.
I do not see a way to resolve the nuclear issue without a peace treaty or a war. We have been pursuing a middle road, neither making peace with the North Koreans nor invading them, for decades. We have avoided a shooting war with the North, but we are also no closer to peace than the day the Korean War ended. And it only takes one warmonger, zealot, or idiot on one side of a conflict to start a war.
Such is the nature of war. You have years and years and years of tense peace in which people don't trust each other, but aren't actually fighting. Then one thing changes, and over the course of mere weeks or months, a war begins.
A forest stands for 10 years. It catches fire in 10 minutes. Plenty of people will have known it was coming. But nobody knew how or when.
The Trump administration isn't going to do anything. It's already preoccupied with all the other goals it's struggling to accomplish. If North Korea pops up in the news enough, the most we will see from the administration is a solitary token gesture that doesn't change the facts on the ground.
And then nothing else. Just like that one token strike on Syria, in which the targets got back to their normal jobs in less than 24 hours after the strike. The Syrian civil war continues unabated. Assad has no reason to fear Trump any more than he did Obama. Assad's calculus hasn't changed; therefore his behavior won't change.
The Chinese will continue to make empty calls for restraint while doing nothing to address the problem. Japan will do nothing; it doesn't have the power to help. South Korea might make overtures to the North, but the North will ignore them. South Korea might threaten the North, but the North will respond in kind.
North Korea will not stop even when it has the ability to strike the United States. A state's need for security is an insatiable hunger; no amount of deterrence and no amount of raw power will ever be enough. The United States and Russia had (and still have) the ability to destroy each other and the world several times over, but that did not end the arms race on either side. Even if the odds of a war with the United States drops to zero--not just one in a million, but flat-out zero--the North Koreans will keep building their capacity to hurt other people. Even if the North is just trying to defend itself, it won't matter. They won't stop.
There is only one thing that ever seems to change in this conflict: the North's ability to cause harm. And it only goes in one direction.
Up.
It only grows.
I agree and what's even scarier is that North Korea is just the first of many. As the decades go by it'll be easier and easier for smaller countries to get nukes. We can only hope that we'll develop the ability to render them harmless before the proverbial excrement hits the fan.
@semiticgod Im bout tired of the US being the self appointed 'sheriff with a gun'' of the world though. That got N Korea (and hatin us in the first place. But leaving the armstice unfinished, in one way or another just seems to let tempers grow, and make negotiations harder. Course some just go buckwild regardless, and don't think things completely through before 'waking a sleeping giant', as Japan seemed to think after Pearl Harbor.
But as to NOW, that the deed is done, we need a solution, compromise, fight, a sit-down? As mentioned it does not seem like anyone in 'sitting office' has the guts to change the status quo. I mean, even a sit down in neutral territory would be a change. At least 'Slick Willy' had a general over for a meet n greet, a lesser official yeah, but at least. Course now, we got poison rags and death by touch, so REALLY secure is an issue.
I'm not even sure if the US has it's BATNA defined as of yet with N. Korea (Best alternative to a negotiated agreement), or even know how to considering N Korea's helpers. As we always hear, 'It's complicated', yep, it is, keeping all the 'players' in the field 'satiated' and happy.
Comments
In his facebook statement that you posted, he claimed to support Sanders because of Sanders policy of 'end the prison and military industrial complexes.'
Coming from an excriminal who has probably spent time in one such institute, it wouldn't be surprising for him to support this one issue that Sanders put forward. It might actually be hos most important policy, although, if he is mentally ill, I'd personally be surprised if he knew exactly what Sanders meant with that type of statement.
That does not mean he supports other Sanders or democratic party policies, just that one and if he had the choice, he'd choose Sanders over Clinton because of this one issue.
Most of his other actions and statements support the far right in politics however. Cherry picking posts from this individual and ignoring the root of why he posted it, doesnt make him something different.
Then why do so?
It is also going to hard for me to phrase, but the mentally ill are usually recruited by terrorist organizations because they are easy to manipulate and expendable. They are usually looking for acceptance since they do not get it, or feel like they do not get it in other areas of their life.
When a mentally ill person does commit a crime like the stabbing, the warning signs for violent outburst were there, but ignored. The illness went untreated because of either cost, ignorance or the social unacceptace of one suffering from such an illness.
This social unacceptace is what leads to the mentally ill from being victims of harassment and violence themselves.
Treating the mentally ill and having a more acceptable approach (love everyone) to them in society can curb some (but not all) of these incidents.
@BelleSorciere is right. Blaming mental illness is simply a way to make the rest of us feel better about the situation, and allow us not to do anything. Not that this country has been serious about taking care of the mentally-ill in recent memory anyway, certainly since Reagan slashed funding for it in the '80s. Most people want them out of sight and out of mind unless they are in the immediate family. But one need only look at the string of incidents in the last few years where parents or caregivers called the cops to help them with their child or charge having an incident and the cops end up SHOOTING them instead of actually helping.
If we use the blanket excuse of mental illness, that allows us not to have to talk about racism, guns, poverty, social alienation perpetuated by the dark corners of the internet, or any number of other issues. We're more than happy to tar and scapegoat those with actual illnesses to make excuses for the perpetrator, but, in all honestly, we're just making excuses for ourselves and how we refuse to deal with hard issues.
Why should racism and sexism go unremarked?
Mentally ill is definitely screwed up and as mentioned before,STILL put on the back burner.
Many states still do not even report all incidents to the FBI database as required to be able to have at least halfway decent records, as far as the gun component goes.
I agree though, it is not a one step solution (many think it is) and I sure don't have all the answers, but just want to see things improved, on a variety of lvls.
Even then, I don't believe for an instant everything can be erradicated with so MANY issues. Some in the political arena in DC sure act like it can though, the jackwagons.
The paradox of tolerance. Being "accepting and tolerant" does not mean "being accepting and tolerant of intolerance." That's not even a gotcha, it's just a bad argument.
Also, you're either trying to impose an agenda on me or assuming that I have an agenda I do not have. I am not interested in converting deplorables to my views. Their views are already abhorrent, and I can't imagine that anything I would do or say would change their views, even if they don't immediately view me as discreditable because of who I am, and may indeed hate me because of who I am.
But for some reason I'm the problem and not the haters because I am unwilling to sugarcoat the fact that the haters are indeed haters. That I'm talking down to them because I refuse to view them with charity or kindness.
My grandmother was practically a saint, yet she had racist tendencies due to her upbringing. She did more good in her life and I wouldn't call her deplorable because of some misguided views.
Painting everyone with the same brush, saying that their gripes and concerns do not matter when it comes to electing a government and their choice is wrong because of X does not help and just entrenches everyone in their own beliefs.
Things aren't black and white, yet people treat them as that. There is middle ground. Everyone moving there is better for a society as a whole.
Being nice gets you nowhere. I think being firm, resolute, is what's needed.
In the U.S. at least, racist is one of the worst things you can possibly be. When accusations of racism start flying, people worry about getting caught in the crossfire.
And yes I will paint them all with the same brush, as deplorable and awful as they are.
And I am sorry if you or anyone else is anxious that you'll be accused of racism or misogyny or anything else, but I'm not responsible for that, and I'm not going to take that fear into account.
But most people aren't bad people and are still racist. And because people are unwilling to own their problems, talking about it gets into this circular nonsense about how unfair or wrong it is or how people are being talked down to.
But I was talking about Nazis, basically. I am not sure I feel about having to spell that out but since people kept lecturing me on how they didn't like it that I was calling anyone racist, I guess it was necessary. TBH I think it should have been obvious. But people were too fixated on the idea that it's important to be ~nice~ to people like that because you might be able to change their minds (you'll never change their minds).
Just because this type of group supports Trump, doesnt mean everyone who supports Trump are like them.
You probably cant even say a vast majority of people who support trump are like this.
I never said everyone who supports trump is like this.
"We don't think you are all racists we think you all are misguided by supporting the side with the racist agendas. True, some of you are deplorables, not all. Even if you personally are not racist, are you proud to share the side with racists? It's kind of like how your side attacks all islam when only some are "radical islamic terrorists" when all islamic people are not like that.
But there's more wrong on the right than just the racism. Here's some other things the left doesn't like about the right:
Supply side economics
Intolerance for anyone not straight white christian
Desires to gut people's education and or christianize it
Desires to ruin the environment for business
Want to make poor people's lives worse
Corporations over people"
This looks like a laundry list for a comic book villain, not a group of actual people. I don't stand for people harassing and discriminating people for their race, religion, gender, etc. and I sure as heck won't stand for it based on politics. When I see crap like this, I am sure as heck going to call it out.
The truth of the matter is that the amount of genetic variation from group A to group B is so small that we really shouldn't refer to different groups of humans as "races" but "breeds" like we do for dogs. Backtracking the rate of mitochondrial DNA mutation, researchers have evidence that points to a "genetic bottleneck" which happened about 75,000 years ago--every human being alive today is a distant descendant of the same small group.
Far too many people throw around the label "racist" these days for things which are not racist. Strangely, many people also think that racism flows in one direction only, from white towards black. Consider the Congressional Black Caucus, whose official policy does not cite skin color as a prerequisite to join; however, if you aren't black then they won't let you in, period. That clearly meets the definition of "racism"--negative discrimination towards people based on skin color.
Finally, just for the sake of argument let us presume that somehow every person in the world was converted so that we all have exactly the same skin color and facial structure. It would take only a few weeks for us to figure out new ways to separate ourselves into groups and we would begin discriminating against each other on that basis. We are all Sneetches.
12% of all adults in the United States had 5 or more chronic health conditions; 60% of all adults have at least one
the most common chronic disorders were (ranked by prevalence): hypertension (high blood pressure), lipid disorders (cholesterol), mood disorders, diabetes mellitus, anxiety disorders, upper respiratory disorders, inflammatory joint disorders other than arthritis, osteoarthritis, asthma, coronary atherosclerosis (heart disease)
the 12% of adults with 5+ chronic conditions account for 41% of all medical spending
if we add in adults with 3+ chronic conditions (a total of 28%) they account for 67% of all medical spending
adults with 0 chronic conditions spent an average of about $1300 each year on medical expenses but...
adults with 5+ chronic conditions spent an average of $18,250 each year on medical expenses; the largest categories of spending in this category were on inpatient care, office/outpatient care, and prescription medication
*************
This study is not designed to influence or direct what sort of health care coverage plan we should have, whether we go back to pre-ACA days, keep the ACA as it currently exists, use whatever plan passes Congress (if a plan passes Congress), or set up an entirely different structure. Rather, this study serves only to identify who spends more (which should be pretty obvious) and how much more they spend as compared to people with fewer long-term health problems.
One thing we can definitely take from this report is that a little preventive medicine saves a lot of money. Under some circumstances, high blood pressure and cholesterol problems may be avoided by proper diet and exercise. Yes, I am aware that sometimes genetics play a factor, which is why I said "some circumstances".
Interestingly, for both men and women the prevalence of mood/anxiety disorders increased from 2008 to 2014. I am uncertain whether this is due to better diagnoses, doctors pushing pills onto people, or a combination of the two. *shrug* Probably a topic for a different thread altogether, though.
I am fairly certain if given the right setting, in person, the conversation would go a little better.
My thoughts as I've been the dutiful listener, mostly.
On a lighter note, I never liked the term race as a descriptor after being exposed to D&D at a very young age. I used to think ' wait a minute, so these other ppl in the world are just human, with more or less just different skin color? How is that a race' I used to think different would be like an elf or dwarf or something for pete's sake, or neanderthal in RL. Anyway.
Shoot, as a southerner I've been called 'cracka' by white folk. Used to laugh and say 'NC, not GA, it's Tar Heel- at least get your location right if your gonna insult me ppl', 'hillbilly' by New Yorkers, redneck and country by city folk. I have to laugh a little because it is almost ludicrous to hear these days, but really, just shows that divides exist and probably always will do to that hard wiring, even if just to a certain extent. So ppl even discriminate again there own 'race'. Ppl see differences, as mentioned, and some just react in a less than thoughtful or fair way.
The way in which we interact with others is the more important bit, IMO.
I am actually glad the whole race issue is getting out in the open again, it's been the elephant in the corner that ppl (white folks mostly) think is invisible these days. Well, the spell is wearing off, it's time to start talking about it again, in a decent manner would be nice.
With more people retiring now, due to the baby boomers generation, ageism is cropping up big time in my opinion (and personal experience).
We even have laws vs ageism, but that doesn't make age discrimination stop, now company's just use overqualified or some crap like that to get around it.
Ppl sometimes see an older person and think 'Different'.
Anyone guilty of that?
Ppl see me, a traumatic burn 'survivor'(don't like that term but there it is), and think "different' and stare sometimes. One CAN'T help but notice differences. Heck, I even notice, just more likely with greater empathy than the 'unburned or unscarred', but ppl with traumatic injuries of any sort often do with another.
Anyone guilty of that?
And yes, it hurts sometimes, ya get used to it but it doesn't disappear, I'll admit. Tell ppl I'm a TI diabetic ' oh, you poor thing' Poor what?
Just that the outside gets noticed more, all I am saying. Ppl DO look and sound different. If someone calls that racist, then so be it.
Pure racism as it is most commonly thought of, is DEFINITELY alive and functioning, not only in the south, but in many places around the world, in one form or another.
Dang, why did I even write this, maybe because just about everything gets pulled into politics these days. Oh well, there it is, and here I am (I think).
I don't care for the hard right, I don't care for the hard left, heck, I don't care about the middle alot of the time. I mostly just get tired of being meddled with by all sides, and the gov'ment in particular likes to meddle just a hair too much at times me thinks.
I sometimes refer to states as the 'stationary bandit lords', as opposed to rule before 'laws' being the 'roving bandit lords'. Now the rovers were at least up front and would kill or steal out in the open for whatever. at least one could expect it comin (mostly). The 'stationary', however, is a lot sneakier, and likes to use taxes & laws in such instead of stealin n killin (even THAT is gettin a little iffy these days). Harder to see but I guess somewhat less of a chaotic affair and more peaceful I suppose. But still, we traded one for another in a way, not necessarily all bad of course.
Now, there's a nice long post worthy of any powergamer's
Shoot, I'm punchin the button anyway, just gonna throw it out there and say 'go fish', like the ol card game.
As to the health issue. Were gonna be outa luck until costs get controlled, and I'm talkin drug and service costs here, that doesn't even address the insurance costs. Shoot, I even caught one doctor by use of tactics admitting that he could raise the price of a $10 injection to $300 cause his insurance company TOLD him to, to make more money. Doctors are so stressed out over the sheer mass of paperwork (computer records) they have less time to spend with a patient these days. Drug companies, combined with insurance companies can make a real killin, when done right(wrong)
AS to chronic conditions, heck yeah it saves to be proactive.
Doctor Hotspot is a good example of this that Frontline did a while back.
As to 2008, people started losing jobs, being foreclosed on, becoming homeless, divorces from money issues, Economy had a good deal to do with it. I LIVED that crap and saw how it affected people. And of Anti-depressants are the go-to for most mental issues as GP's know very little about the mental aspect (some do).
We also have the biggest generation in history now retiring and living longer than ever before. Chronic conditions can definitely increase with age, Alzheimers in particular. And with drugs to stay alive, companies can have a real cash crop there. The US is getting close, and will be there soon as regard the older folks vs newborns. Folks from south of the border are the youngest group and keeping the US age down a little.
Drug companies push their newest and 'bestest' products when older things still work fine. T2 Diabetes is just a breeding ground for keeping them in business and NOT finding cures. I ain't even gettin into my own T1. Insulin aught to be the price of a soft drink by now. But there is just NO long term company money in fixin diabetes.
Health care industry, not a system, is what we have here, one of the last holdouts in the world.
Now even insurance companies are leaving areas.
We just had a hospital here in the mountains that is getting rid of labor and delivery because the population is older and more poorer folk are the ones having more kids, and can't afford the high cost. NC opted out of the medicaid expansion(rightly or wrongly) so there is as not much to fund profit making hospitals.
And all most politicians go on about his the dadgum insurance companies and the right plan for people to shack up with. Like THAT'S gonna help REALLY help health costs that much.
When ppl are MADE to buy some kinda 'insurance', of course, insurance is gonna go up after a while. 'Yeah, yeah, they GOT to buys our stuff now Bubba, lets raise prices. Let's join into big insurance conglomerates as well. Were gonna make Ma Bell look like a Mr Rodgers show'.
Health IS tied into politics, and in a big way. School menus(funding), food choices (funding), drug advertising, food advertising, computer sit on the butt age, care for the older generation, low cost housing availability, etc. etc. To top that off, many in power are listening to the wrong ppl for the right solutions to try and make things better. This could go on and on but will leave it at that.
Anyone here visited a food bank on a regular basis in their life? If you have you now the poor make choices of food not because they are dumb, but because they don't have the money and are seriously stresed about life and how just to make it another week.
Yeah, I'm a little bugged at this countries approach to public and private health.
And I don't mind voicing this from an earlier background in public health education. ACA looked like a recipe for an insurance nightmare when I actually SAW in my head what was gonna happen. The new GOP bill doesn't even seem to address as much as that did and if focusing basically on Ins. companies, will not do a whole darn lot. Will see.
Ain't health capitalism just great?
Whewwww. I gotta get some hobgoblins or something in BG after THAT. Maybe I could find some in DC, sure are enough politicians acting like some.
Now back to your regularly schedule program of terrorism, trumpism, democratism, and republicanism, racism, and, er, gotta be another ism here somewhere. MAybe me, grandstandism on a soapbox.
EDIT: Politics and healthcare industry talkin gets me ta needin coffee and chocolate eatin'.
I do not see a way to resolve the nuclear issue without a peace treaty or a war. We have been pursuing a middle road, neither making peace with the North Koreans nor invading them, for decades. We have avoided a shooting war with the North, but we are also no closer to peace than the day the Korean War ended. And it only takes one warmonger, zealot, or idiot on one side of a conflict to start a war.
Such is the nature of war. You have years and years and years of tense peace in which people don't trust each other, but aren't actually fighting. Then one thing changes, and over the course of mere weeks or months, a war begins.
A forest stands for 10 years. It catches fire in 10 minutes. Plenty of people will have known it was coming. But nobody knew how or when.
The Trump administration isn't going to do anything. It's already preoccupied with all the other goals it's struggling to accomplish. If North Korea pops up in the news enough, the most we will see from the administration is a solitary token gesture that doesn't change the facts on the ground.
And then nothing else. Just like that one token strike on Syria, in which the targets got back to their normal jobs in less than 24 hours after the strike. The Syrian civil war continues unabated. Assad has no reason to fear Trump any more than he did Obama. Assad's calculus hasn't changed; therefore his behavior won't change.
The Chinese will continue to make empty calls for restraint while doing nothing to address the problem. Japan will do nothing; it doesn't have the power to help. South Korea might make overtures to the North, but the North will ignore them. South Korea might threaten the North, but the North will respond in kind.
North Korea will not stop even when it has the ability to strike the United States. A state's need for security is an insatiable hunger; no amount of deterrence and no amount of raw power will ever be enough. The United States and Russia had (and still have) the ability to destroy each other and the world several times over, but that did not end the arms race on either side. Even if the odds of a war with the United States drops to zero--not just one in a million, but flat-out zero--the North Koreans will keep building their capacity to hurt other people. Even if the North is just trying to defend itself, it won't matter. They won't stop.
There is only one thing that ever seems to change in this conflict: the North's ability to cause harm. And it only goes in one direction.
Up.
It only grows.
http://mil-embedded.com/guest-blogs/sixth-generation-warfare-manipulating-space-and-time/
http://mil-embedded.com/
@semiticgod Im bout tired of the US being the self appointed 'sheriff with a gun'' of the world though. That got N Korea (and hatin us in the first place.
Course some just go buckwild regardless, and don't think things completely through before 'waking a sleeping giant', as Japan seemed to think after Pearl Harbor.
But as to NOW, that the deed is done, we need a solution, compromise, fight, a sit-down? As mentioned it does not seem like anyone in 'sitting office' has the guts to change the status quo.
I mean, even a sit down in neutral territory would be a change. At least 'Slick Willy' had a general over for a meet n greet, a lesser official yeah, but at least. Course now, we got poison rags and death by touch, so REALLY secure is an issue.
I'm not even sure if the US has it's BATNA defined as of yet with N. Korea (Best alternative to a negotiated agreement), or even know how to considering N Korea's helpers. As we always hear, 'It's complicated', yep, it is, keeping all the 'players' in the field 'satiated' and happy.