Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapemask View Post
    It's this statement from the White House that drives me nuts:

    THE TERMS ARE ALREADY VERY FAVORABLE. We are losing nothing. That is not how any of this works. The "terms," if they could even be called such, were already laughably small to begin with. Between this and what Trump himself said back in June about "China can build more coal plants, but we can't," I don't think this administration even has any idea what the thing is about.
    That and technically we don't have to do anything that agreement says, because, you know, it's not legally binding in any way. The fact that our leaders are this dumb about the Paris agreement is just mind boggling.

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  2. #22
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    Quote Originally Posted by Dontrike View Post
    That and technically we don't have to do anything that agreement says, because, you know, it's not legally binding in any way. The fact that our leaders are this dumb about the Paris agreement is just mind boggling.
    It's Trump.
    I'm not sure why you expect an intelligent decision at this point.

  3. #23
    Stood in the Fire Arvei's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    h*ck
    Posts
    442
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapemask View Post
    It's this statement from the White House that drives me nuts:

    THE TERMS ARE ALREADY VERY FAVORABLE. We are losing nothing. That is not how any of this works. The "terms," if they could even be called such, were already laughably small to begin with. Between this and what Trump himself said back in June about "China can build more coal plants, but we can't," I don't think this administration even has any idea what the thing is about.
    I mean, they've gotta be pretty damn paranoid about the rest of the world if they think the agreement was meant to give them the shaft by giving a non-binding agreement saying "set your own goals." Not really surprising though with the amount of fear mongering this administration does.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Belize View Post
    It's Trump.
    I'm not sure why you expect an intelligent decision at this point.
    Frankly, at this point I'm just trying to hope he gives a thought process that of a wet sponge, at least that sponge just occasionally falls over. Trump is worse than a sponge.

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Arvei View Post
    I mean, they've gotta be pretty damn paranoid about the rest of the world if they think the agreement was meant to give them the shaft by giving a non-binding agreement saying "set your own goals." Not really surprising though with the amount of fear mongering this administration does.
    Global warming was invented by China.

  6. #26
    Banned GennGreymane's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wokeville mah dood
    Posts
    45,475
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    Global warming was invented by China.
    I mean look at all those political shirts people wear that say stuff about global warming. Made in China!

    It was a plot to sell cloths.

  7. #27
    Merely a Setback Adam Jensen's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sarif Industries, Detroit
    Posts
    29,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Belize View Post
    It's Trump.
    I'm not sure why you expect an intelligent decision at this point.
    Because the God Emperor is playing 11D chess. You don't see the endgame until we're #winning.
    Putin khuliyo

  8. #28
    Trump is seriously senile. He has onset dementia or alzheimers. Slim chance he will be diagnosed since his handlers will deny it. I say within the year he leaves office this will get leaked.
    Democrats are the best! I will never ever question a Democrat again. I LOVE the Democrats!

  9. #29
    Banned Kontinuum's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Heart of the Fortress
    Posts
    2,404
    Paris climate deal: Trump open to staying in, Tillerson says
    Donald Trump is open to staying in the Paris accord on climate change, his secretary of state has said, just hours after the White House insisted there would be "no change" to US policy.
    Rex Tillerson said the US would stay in the agreement "if we can construct a set of terms that we believe is fair".
    His comments come despite the White House earlier denying reports it was softening its stance on the accord.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41300036

  10. #30
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,908
    Quote Originally Posted by Kontinuum View Post
    Paris climate deal: Trump open to staying in, Tillerson says
    And McMaster, And Cohn.

    This isn't about renegotiating, the terms are long-term, nonbinding, and voluntary. Leaving did nothing but make the USA look bad, and it's not realistic to renegotiate the countries that didn't leave, to do more, when they're not the ones who left.

  11. #31
    It was never ratified by Congress so we were never in it to begin with.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Healing Rain View Post
    It was never ratified by Congress so we were never in it to begin with.
    It isn't a fucking treaty, so it doesn't require congressional ratification.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Healing Rain View Post
    It was never ratified by Congress so we were never in it to begin with.
    It isn't a fucking treaty, so it doesn't require congressional ratification.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Tillerson is waffling on the issue.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41300036

    Suffice it to say, nobody knows what the fuck is going on. The left and right hands are both shoved up the WH's ass.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Healing Rain View Post
    It was never ratified by Congress so we were never in it to begin with.
    I just.....how....okay, sure, you're right.

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Healing Rain View Post
    It was never ratified by Congress so we were never in it to begin with.
    Good job! Here's your reward!

  16. #36
    The Insane Acidbaron's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Belgium, Flanders
    Posts
    18,230
    Does not matter, already knew most states would do their part.

    The US still lost face on this regardless of what happens now.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Acidbaron View Post
    Does not matter, already knew most states would do their part.

    The US still lost face on this regardless of what happens now.
    Only the states that have the education to understand that it is happening. Which pretty much leaves out the states that rely on fossil fuels for their economies and all of the South.

  18. #38
    I wrote this some time ago. It's relelvant to how I feel on the topic. Sorry for the early aside (it was a different topic).

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    The Iran deal is legitimately a *crap* deal from almost every angle. The criticism of Obama being Iran's lawyer? Basically true.

    But that being said, the boat has sailed on this one and the deal is important to our European friends. And the US has bigger fish to fry with Russia, China and North Korea.

    Preserve the deal of course. But anyone thinking that the deal was any kind of achievement for Obama is kidding themselves. Non-partisanly, it is a textbook case in bad diplomacy and dishonest political marketing.

    But that's oh-so-typical of Obama. The Iran deal is legitimately exhibit A of a guy who thought of himself more as a global citizen and global figure than fierce advocate for America's interests. "MAGA" and "America First" has it's roots in exactly the nonsense thinking that the Iran deal sprung from. America was an aggreieved party in the Iran-negotiations, not a mediator. When then did the Obama Administration adopt the tact of basically acting as a mediator between the American "Iran consensus" (minus Obama's Administration)and Iran? That's why this deal is fucked.

    Or let me put it another way:the break down in the Normal Order in the Senate? This is exhibit B of that. Instead of constructing a deal that Obama could get through the Senate for approval, which is the way things should be, instead Republicans and Democrats put on a grand show whereby a "resolution for disapproval" was blocked 3 times by filibusterer (58-42), and because of that, the deal was executed without Congressional objection. That is such an ass backwards, dishonest, bad way of governing. And the thing is: Obama went into negotiations knowing that would be the route. Similar to how with the Paris Climate change agreement, it was constructed as an "executive agreement" rather than a "formal treaty" with absurd mechanisms for withdraw.

    Obama defenders say it's because Republican Congress would have blocked anything. As a foreign policy-centric Republican, I can tell you that's absolutely not true. It's that Obama's White House (if not the President) didn't even bother to try. For the record, I don't want us out of the Paris Accord either, but how that was negotiated and (laughably) "ratified" by this country (note: it wasn't, it's flat out lying political talk to say it is) is emblematic at everything wrong with Obama's second term foreign policy.

    Process matters. Process legitimizes. The problem with the Iran Deal and the Paris Climate Change Agreement domestically is the exact same problem as using reconciliation to pass Obamacare in 2009: short cuts and sneaky-if-legal political/legal routes for big ticket items that are not inclusive to all parties may get you passed political roadblocks, but they dog the legitimacy of the thing in question for years. John McCain has been saying exactly this for weeks with Trumpcare, mentioning how that if Trumpcare passed via reconcillation, the next time Democrats retake power in Congress, they'll do the same thing to reverse Trumpcare, since that is how Obamacare was passed in the first place.

    Or to put it another way, if the Iran deal or Paris Climate Change treaty could not get 66 votes in the Senate under Article II Section 2 rules, the negotiations never should have stopped and Obama's job wasn't done. That is the process and the process doesn't give a fuck about the "fierce urgency of now" and shit like that. The framers made the 2/3rds majority threshold for treaties challenging on purpose and the run-around Obama did and the questionable legitimacy from that is exactly the situation they sought to avoid.

    People living over 220 years ago knew a lot better than Barry O about the nature of legitimacy.

    But it's also not worth re-litigating. Any energy spent on Iran is energy not spent on Russia, China and North Korea. The Iran ship has sailed. But never again. Going forward, 66 votes, or no deals.
    Oh and this one:

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    Our society has gotten far, far, far too comfortable with these inconvenient shortcuts through procedure and there needs to be a renorming. In Democracies, procedure, under the law, legitimizes. Let me offer a counter example - it was patently ridiculous for Obama and his supporters to groundlessly call the Paris Climate Treaty 'ratified' a few months back, because the Senate never voted and gave a 2/3rds majority assent to it. Obama signing on to an Executive Agreement does not "ratify" anything and it is deeply irresponsible of him and his supporters to use that word and imply it is a Treaty, outside the norms of how the actual treaty process works. This was of course, the case because Obama would never be able to get the Paris Climate Treaty through the Senate. While Obama signing onto an executive agreement is legitimate, implying it has the legal weight and is worthy of the the standing of a treaty, is wholly illegitimate. Basically no process, no legitimacy. Simple as that. And I say that as someone generally in favor of the treaty, but hey, President Obama's entire Eight Years were Mr. Shortcut on his part, so that was par for the course for him.

    We should never forget the monumental stupidity, in retrospect, of the "Fierce Urgency of Now" and all that crap that glib jackass hoisted on this country in order to justify his extraordinary lassitude in politicking to win difficult votes. Because of that we should hold our leaders and ourselves to the HIGHEST standards of the law, of procedure, and of democracy and not the lowest. Procedure and institutions are the foundation of functional democracy. Hell the failure of nation building the world over more than anything else is, in part, a failure of the ability to build institutions BY establishing fair, independent, just procedures under the law. Even when it's written down you get things like the Iraqi prime minister doing most anything he wants.
    Don't get me wrong. The US should not "leave" the Paris Climate Accord now. The diplomatic costs of it would be enormous... the damage far out weighing the benefits.

    But the manner in which it was constructed... and how Obama agreed the US to it, via executive agreement with a protracted exit clause, rather than as a formal treaty, is so monumentally fucked, that it stands as a exemplar of the breakdown of the normal order of managing US policy.

    Climate Change is a pressing issue. Hundred percent agree. The major industrial powers must strike a multinational agreement. Hundred percent agree. But suspending the normal routes by which the US becomes party to these agreements by sidestepping Congressional approval? Absolutely fucking not. The process legitimizes, period, and because of the outside-the-spirit-of-the-rules process it followed, the Paris Climate Change deal has no legitimacy for the United States.

    I say that full well understanding the implications of that. If the polar ice caps were melting and the seas rising at a rate of an inch a month, I would say the same thing, because once we decide the "fierce urgency of now" allows for the suspending of the process for something that one guy who some people decide is dire enough, than that line of thinking can apply to anything.

    If Paris was important enough, Obama should have presented it as a treaty. Who have getting 66 votes in the Senate been extraordinarily hard? Yep. But it's supposed to be. It's not supposed to be a rubber stamp. That's democracy in action where power is divided between many hands, and the fierce urgency of now, for any cause, does not supercede that fact. Obama may never have gotten Paris. A successor or two down the line may have. But that slow process would have created legitimacy and built up assent the slow and methodical way... instead whatever we have now.


    You can be a fan of how the US became party to the Paris Accord, or you can have respect for the spirit of the Constitution, whereby the US enters international agreements by advice and consent of the Senate. You cannot do both.

    Trump should not remove the US from Paris. But the next President to try a Paris should be impeached, no matter who it is, no matter the reason. It could be for climate change. It could be for an international ban Coldplay... I don't care. There is one way to do international agreements under the Constitution, and we follow it to the letter, period. There is no excuses for an alternative. The next President to try doesn't get to be President. We are a nation of laws.

  19. #39
    The Insane Glorious Leader's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In my bunker leading uprisings
    Posts
    19,214
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    We are a nation of laws.
    You formerly were a nation of laws. You failed to bring reagan to trial for iran contra. You failed to prosecute bush and cheney for war crimes. You failed to prosecute wallstreet for the fraud that drove the recession.

    You are no longer a nation of law and order.
    The hammer comes down:
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmeric View Post
    Normal should be reduced in difficulty. Heroic should be reduced in difficulty.
    And the tiny fraction for whom heroic raids are currently well tuned? Too bad,so sad! With the arterial bleed of subs the fastest it's ever been, the vanity development that gives you guys your own content is no longer supportable.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Glorious Leader View Post
    You are no longer a nation of law and order.
    False. There have been five Law & Order series, with a sixth under production. We have the most Laws & Orders out of anybody. At least one of them is always on in syndication somewhere, so our great nation is in a constant state of Law & Order.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •