Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
They can have any opinion they want. While my country provides for their safety, and while they're basically reaping the economic benefits of military dependency while we pay the costs, I don't give a rats ass about their opinion.

so again, if I'm at a conference and an American scientist stands up to talk,
is the right response for me to say 'hey, your country hasn't signed the convention on discrimination against women, so I don't give a rat's was about your opinion'?

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [iron_mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Is dependency really that confusing a concept to you?








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
Is dependency really that confusing a concept to you?

It's not confusing, it's just a completely made up bullshit metric for you to use to judge whether someone is allowed to express their opinions about President Trump's bona fides regarding women's issues.

Are you allowed to talk about the US government at all? Pretty sure you're dependent on the govt for your defense, so I guess you get to shut your trap as well, huh?

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
yes.

confusing in this instance specifically because your position is so adolescent, and generally because you've not explained how dependency is defined, when, why, or by whom, nor why the 'dependency' of the government of country where a person currently stands ought to disqualify that person's opinion.

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
We're paying for it, right?

Hey, maybe we're only paying 60% of the agreed upon price. Do you think?

Still do not understand how NATO is working.

NATO does not have a price. It is not a gym membership.

Also, the only country that has benefited from evoking article 5 in the NATO treaty is the USA, after 9/11.
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [iron_mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Alright. Let's look at this from the other direction, and see if that helps.

Tell me why I, as an American, should give a rats ass about Germany's opinion about the president? Why should I give a rats ass if they boo his daughter? Why should I give that act any credence at all? Because I don't. Convince me.








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
Ooooooh.

Yeah, you totally got me.

Get a grip, moocher.

Really, the bigger issue shouldn't be whether or not NATO allies are meeting the 2% GDP level. The truth is, it's more important that they meet their NATO commitments. Theoretically a country could meet the 2% GDP level and completely fail to live up to that countries standard. So honestly which do you prefer quality or quantity, as with everything else they're not the same.
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [iron_mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's a dick thing. It's like when I was talking about shoes with my girlfriend and I kept changing the subject to cars. The dumb dick of a man won't let us talk about the issue if it's not about dick size. "That big bomb makes my willy feel huge! We got bigger bombs than Germany and they won't pay us enough for our big bombs!"
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [Halvard] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Still do not understand how NATO is working.

You're right, you don't.

NATO does have dues. Like a gym membership, if you like. That's how its direct funding is provided.

Nobody is talking about that, though.

NATO members also have an obligation to maintain their own military forces in order to provide for the common defense- that's the entire idea behind NATO. The agreed upon benchmark for military spending to maintain those forces is 2% of GDP. And Germany isn't meeting it. Because, as NATO itself notes, it relies on the US to provide security.

Also, the only country that has benefited from evoking article 5 in the NATO treaty is the USA, after 9/11.

Yes, that totally seems like it's worth the hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars that our oversized military costs.










"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
The agreed upon benchmark for military spending to maintain those forces is 2% of GDP.

You should stop repeating this, because it's not what the NATO countries have agreed to. They have agreed to aim to move towards 2% spending. Not the same thing. I understand it's a small difference, but within the realm of international agreements and diplomacy, those little things mean big differences.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
Yes, that totally seems like it's worth the hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars that our oversized military costs.


Your country's oversized military is your own country's doing. Don't pretend like it's selfless.

As a Canadian it most assuredly benefits me, but that's different than you paying tax dollars directly and expressly to fund my own defense.
Last edited by: timbasile: Apr 26, 17 17:25
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No, commodore. 2% is the agreed upon level, as of 2006, and it was reinforced in 2014, when members agreed that those who had been remiss would start increasing spending in order to achieve that level. Just because countries were given time to reach that level doesn't mean it isn't the benchmark.

And again, even under your excessively lax interpretation, Germany is not meeting its obligation. It hasn't increased spending in order to move closer to the 2% benchmark. It has no intention of doing so.








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
Alright. Let's look at this from the other direction, and see if that helps.

Tell me why I, as an American, should give a rats ass about Germany's opinion about the president? Why should I give a rats ass if they boo his daughter? Why should I give that act any credence at all? Because I don't. Convince me.

First, I don't know whether you should care about the opinions of these specific people at this specific conference regarding our President. I don't know if anyone should care that much about the opinions of a small number of average people from one country about the leader of another country, in general. What you shouldn't do is base your caring on whether or not Germany meets an aspirational NATO goal of 2% defense spending. There are other areas in which Germany and the USA depend on each other, on the international stage other than simply defense spending of NATO allies.

Germany doesn't resist increased defense spending because they like to rely on the US for their defense. They resist defense spending because they have a massive national complex about WWII, and it's very difficult to convince their populace to beef up their military as a result of that national sense of guilt and caution.

Germany plays a pretty strong leadership role in Europe, including the G7, NATO, and a few other organizations. Germany participates in NATO, although not in the numbers we might want. But their participation in Afghanistan, the Balkans, Africa, etc (along with other "under-contributing" nations) allows us to leverage the concept of global coalition, lending legitimacy to the efforts we want to pursue. Many of these nations, including Germany, also contribute quite a bit in terms of information sharing, going after financial networks for terrorism, etc. Germany is also the largest European economy, and as such, our economic fates are somewhat intertwined. I think they've got something like $250 billion invested in our economy, and we have a lot invested in theirs (not sure how much). We also have a lot of companies in the US owned by German companies, employing a lot of Americans. As I mentioned, they play leadership roles on a bunch of international organizations, on which we want/need their support to get things done that we want. In short, Germany is important to US foreign policy.

Does that mean that it's super important how a handful of people feel about Ivanka Trump at a female empowerment conference? Not necessarily. But it is probably important, or at least interesting, to keep a finger on the pulse of the German public towards the US, our leadership, and our policies, because they have the ability to impact our goals around the world.

There are some countries that we could probably just dismiss as unimportant because of their lack of contribution or impact on us. Germany is a poor example to choose if that's the point you want to make.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
No, commodore. 2% is the agreed upon level, as of 2006, and it was reinforced in 2014, when members agreed that those who had been remiss would start increasing spending in order to achieve that level.

Vitus, I quoted the agreement to you. If you refuse to read it, or acknowledge what it says, that's your choice.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply

First, I don't know whether you should care about the opinions of these specific people at this specific conference regarding our President.

Well then we don't have anything to argue about. That's my point. I don't give a damn about what the Germans think about our president or our politics. As far as I'm concerned, the German's can take their opinion and cram it.

I don't know if anyone should care that much about the opinions of a small number of average people from one country about the leader of another country, in general. What you shouldn't do is base your caring on whether or not Germany meets an aspirational NATO goal of 2% defense spending. There are other areas in which Germany and the USA depend on each other, on the international stage other than simply defense spending of NATO allies.

"Aspirational." lol. Whatever.

The reason I brought up defense spending is because back when I asked why the hell I should give a damn about Germany's opinion of our president, I got the usually mealy mouthed platitudes about international opinion and national prestige, and all that rot. As if that really counts for anything, especially when the party bitching is dependent on us for national security. It's a money talks, bullshit walks thing. People can blather on and on about "national prestige" and "leadership on the global stage" all they want. At the end of the day, Germany relies on us to protect them. That's the bottom line. If they were independent, maybe we should take their disapproval more seriously. But they aren't, so they can stuff it.


Germany doesn't resist increased defense spending because they like to rely on the US for their defense. They resist defense spending because they have a massive national complex about WWII, and it's very difficult to convince their populace to beef up their military as a result of that national sense of guilt and caution.

Yeah? Pull out of NATO and see how long that lasts.


There are some countries that we could probably just dismiss as unimportant because of their lack of contribution or impact on us. Germany is a poor example to choose if that's the point you want to make.

I didn't say Germany is unimportant, and that's not the point I want to make. My point is that there's no reason to take their opinion of our politics seriously.









"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You're really taking that thread about last man standing in an argument on LR wins aren't you. You're being spanked and you keep coming back for more punishment.
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
"Aspirational." lol. Whatever.

Not sure how else to describe a goal to "aim to move towards" something.

Quote:
The reason I brought up defense spending is because back when I asked why the hell I should give a damn about Germany's opinion of our president, I got the usually mealy mouthed platitudes about international opinion and national prestige, and all that rot. As if that really counts for anything, especially when the party bitching is dependent on us for national security. It's a money talks, bullshit walks thing. People can blather on and on about "national prestige" and "leadership on the global stage" all they want. At the end of the day, Germany relies on us to protect them. That's the bottom line. If they were independent, maybe we should take their disapproval more seriously. But they aren't, so they can stuff it.

So basically, you're too dense or stubborn to acknowledge that international relationships work on more than just whose military is strongest. Good to know. I won't bother engaging you on this type of topic anymore.

Quote:
I didn't say Germany is unimportant, and that's not the point I want to make. My point is that there's no reason to take their opinion of our politics seriously.
So,...it's not that they are unimportant, it's just that their opinion doesn't matter. Got it.





Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:

I didn't say Germany is unimportant, and that's not the point I want to make. My point is that there's no reason to take their opinion of our politics seriously.

You are conflating the opinion of a few Germans with the opinion of Germany. They are not the same.
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
Alright. Let's look at this from the other direction, and see if that helps.

Tell me why I, as an American, should give a rats ass about Germany's opinion about the president? Why should I give a rats ass if they boo his daughter? Why should I give that act any credence at all? Because I don't. Convince me.

Sounds to me like you do give a rats ass that they booed his daughter. You've gotten very worked up about it.

Generally when I don't give a rats ass about something I don't get worked up about it at all.

Maybe it just works differently in the US, what the hell do I know?

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:

So basically, you're too dense or stubborn to acknowledge that international relationships work on more than just whose military is strongest. Good to know. I won't bother engaging you on this type of topic anymore.

WHO KNEW INTERNATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS WERE THIS COMPLICATED?

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
WHO KNEW INTERNATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS WERE THIS COMPLICATED?

Jared.

He'll fix this shit.

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W
Quote Reply
Re: Oh poor Ivanka.... [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
Alright. Let's look at this from the other direction, and see if that helps.

Tell me why I, as an American, should give a rats ass about Germany's opinion about the president? Why should I give a rats ass if they boo his daughter? Why should I give that act any credence at all? Because I don't. Convince me.

why should you give a rat's ass?

generally, i think it's a wise strategy to be open to finding wisdom wherever you can. i think it's wise to consider opinions that might build on what you already know, or offer you a fresh perspective, or otherwise enrich your understanding.

there might some good reasons to be prejudiced about the opinions of an entire class of people: you might say, for instance, that you don't value the opinion of criminals, or proven liars, or that you have some sort of threshold for experience or qualifications that you think are required before a person's contributions merit serious attention.

by why you think that the merit of a person's opinion (particularly on issues of women's economic empowerment) should be weighed based on the amount of money that the government of the country in which that person is currently standing spends on defense, i have no idea.

that's sort of like telling your mechanic that his opinion about your carburetor is irrelevant because he has such a short vertical leap, or telling your neighbor that you won't listen to his opinion about the weather because his father likes the red sox.

-mike

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/
Quote Reply

Prev Next