re: WTF--House votes 419-3 on new Russia sanctions bill???

quote:

---

Brussels will sanction us. Now it will be more difficult to buy... Ok, I have no idea what they make over there.

---

sprouts

quote:

---

.. if you can't understand why 419 to 13 don't think like you? There no way we'll be able to get through that dense skull.

---

Exactly. If 419 people say you're wrong and 3 say you're correct then maybe, just maybe, you should rethink your position

quote:

---

It's interesting when you choose to believe American intelligence agencies. I bet we could figure out the pattern.

---

Nothing quite signals a persons intellectual honesty then when they immediately reach for the ad hominems.

Do you have anything of value to say about what he actually said?

What expertise are you leaning on that makes you confident in disputing the position of the NSA, CIA, FBI, and Trump's own intelligence people that testified they agree with the consensus?

Who were the 3 that voted against?

quote:

---

I'm all for anything that limits the power of the executive. Obama had too much authority to deal unilaterally with countries, and I don't want any future President (including Trump) to have so much of a say. If you don't want to sanction Russia any more, vote your congressman out.

---

This is honestly one of the more interesting developments in a meta sense stemming from Trump.

And a bit ironic given his opponents were scared of his executive over-reach in foreign policy(not that that is going away just from this) and his supporters basically cheering it on.

The complete lack of faith in Trump's competence, by even his own party, to competently conduct foreign policy, especially with regards to Russia, has started a process somewhat of pulling back on some of the imperialist presidential powers that have roots back to Truman with the Korean war.

Putting more power back with the legislator, more checks and balances, as the founders intended, is probably a good thing.

It isn't appeasement, it's political reality. What do sanctions accomplish? Seriously, our politicians say we look weak if we do nothing, but do we not understand the world simultaneously laughs at us and loses what miniscule credibility we have left because of our hypocrisy? I would argue that imposing and enforcing sanctions against an enemy for something that we ourselves blithely do damages our credibility worse than doing nothing.

We invaded Iraq in 2002, an act Kofi Annan deemed illegal and in contravention of the UN Charter, as we did not have a Security Council authorization. Did that stop us? Hell no. Would sanctions have stopped us? Hell no. Our ruling elite wanted war and they got it.

You keep talking about accountability for our actions. There is no accountability for us, as we are the world's superpower. There is accountability only for those who aren't our allies. We should not be imposing sanctions on countries for the same kinds of acts we've committed and not been sanctioned for simply because we rule the world.

quote:

---

It isn't appeasement, it's political reality. What do sanctions accomplish? Seriously, our politicians say we look weak if we do nothing, but do we not understand the world simultaneously laughs at us and loses what miniscule credibility we have left because of our hypocrisy? I would argue that imposing and enforcing sanctions against an enemy for something that we ourselves blithely do damages our credibility worse than doing nothing.

---

It is appeasement. I asked you before what the distinction between advocating inaction toward Russian aggressions, hostilities, and human rights violations is from appeasement. You still haven't answered.

The thing you aren't grasping is that this entire cyber attack has motivations from the sanctions. Which in fact signals they did their job of inflicting harm.

Do you know why adoptions is the cover? Because that was the Russians weak counter to try and look strong at home and inflict harm toward us. Why the Magnitsky Act was talked about in that meeting with a Kremlin tied, oligarch lawyer? Because the sanctions have in fact hurt Russia. Not just economically but their oligarchs are not happy. Which is really important for someone like Putin who's power is deeply intertwined with the oligarchic elite and their criminal enterprises.

They don't like having their assets frozen, their corrupt businesses harmed, access to critical markets shut off, blocked from traveling to places in the first world. They don't like looking weak to their domestic audience and failing to make good on promises like a booming economy Putin promised them in exchange for his power and isn't happening.

The difference between us and Russia is that we have a democratic form of government. Which is a step much further then Russia. We have also earned our allies by being the better actor on the world stage compared to the alternatives. But unless you are advocating some powerful international government, the hegemonic arrangement will always necessitate and allow ugly actions. But that doesnt mean you let an even worse actor, doing even worse actions, with even worse motives, go unchecked.

Inaction has consequences just like action does, you can't run away from that fact. And inaction toward Russia on these actions would only embolden further ones.

quote:

---

What then is the world supposed to do about America?

---

I'm not a citizen of the world, so I don't give a frick.

While our foreign policy exploits are frequently ill advised, respecting the sovereignty of other countries that our fricking with our security or interests just isn't something I care about.

quote:

---

The sanctions are wrong because it's becoming more clear everyday that Russia was not involved. Can't wait for the veto on those grounds

---

What is ironic is that the signal from Trump I don't think has reached the Trumpkins yet.
LINK

At this point even Trump realizes that even if he wanted to, this vote is veto proof.

He sits on the bill and he looks indecisive(and the bill becomes law in 10 days anyways) and Trump hates that. He veto's it and congress will just override the veto.

So he'll sign it. Probably make some passive aggressive and immature tweets about it a few days later. Send his lackeys to throw out some lines on Sunday news shows. Maybe use it as a shield for the next big thing that the investigation turns up.