Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Lionator

The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

By Lionator, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

That opens another can of worms. The planet is overpopulated by humans. In the last 50 years it has doubled to its current level of around 8 billion. It is humans who ultimately create co2, is it not. If we could go back to 5 or 6 billion I wonder what impact it would have on the temperature rise. To me it feels like we’re fighting a losing battle. 

Nah, not buying the Malthusian line either.

 

Tech developments, if applied correctly, should be enough to support a "topped out" human population (projected at around 10-11 billion) without a crash that results in lots of people dying.

 

If that's wrong and such a crash is inevitable, then so be it, but I'd rather not accept it as inevitable before it happens. Seems morally unacceptable.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fazzer 7

Fazzer 7

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Nah, not buying the Malthusian line either.

 

Tech developments, if applied correctly, should be enough to support a "topped out" human population (projected at around 10-11 billion) without a crash that results in lots of people dying.

 

If that's wrong and such a crash is inevitable, then so be it, but I'd rather not accept it as inevitable before it happens. Seems morally unacceptable.

Nature will decide in the end, we're just tinkering.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bourbon Fox

Bourbon Fox

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 30/08/2022 at 12:23, fox_up_north said:

Can we get footage of Glastonbury from 1971, just to check they didn't leave any mess? 

 

I'm 33 and have been to a few dozen festivals in different countries, starting in 2002. Every single one of them was a mess that required cleaning afterwards. This is not a new phenomenon. It is even referenced in Wayne's World 2, from all the way back in the early 90s.

 

As others said - stop turning on each other. Dickheads have always been around and parts of seas and rivers are biologically dead due to rubbish - was that young people at festivals?

 

No, it was fuching companies getting away with dumping stuff in the oceans. Blame them. Don't spend with them. Pressure your MP. 

 

I was at Leeds 21 years ago and the rioting, burning and destruction were far, far worse.

 

Think 'stewards barricaded in a toilet compound while firebombs were thrown over the walls until the whole place went up' kind of levels.

 

Every portakabin and gas storage burned, site vehicles joyridden and burned out, full anti-riot baton charge by hundreds of police, the works.

 

It is a strange tradition that's especially particular to Leeds and Reading, and I'm sure there are plenty of sociological reasons why.

 

It's not just this generation - in fact when I saw a couple of bonfires and a load of litter on the news it struck me as very tame compared to the early 2000s.

Edited by Bourbon Fox
Link to comment
Share on other sites
StonyFox

StonyFox

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, Bourbon Fox said:

I was at Leeds 21 years ago and the rioting, burning and destruction were far, far worse.

 

Think 'stewards barricaded in a toilet compound while firebombs were thrown over the walls until the whole place went up' kind of levels.

 

Every portakabin and gas storage burned, site vehicles joyridden and burned out, full anti-riot baton charge by hundreds of police, the works.

 

It is a strange tradition that's especially particular to Leeds and Reading, and I'm sure there are plenty of sociological reasons why.

 

It's not just this generation - in fact when I saw a couple of bonfires and a load of litter on the news it struck me as very tame compared to the early 2000s.

I was camped in the field where they firebombed the toilets 💩🔥. It's certainly not a new thing, just another story to try and turn the old against the young 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bourbon Fox

Bourbon Fox

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

Cheers for that Vlad! What a load of nonsense.

Appears to be confirmed by the US Security Council official, and the Ukrainian Pravda, which is Czech-owned and generally non-partisan

Edited by Bourbon Fox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bourbon Fox

Bourbon Fox

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

Pretty sure he's missed some stuff out

 

 

I'd also like to learn more about the Johnson government's knowledge of the child sex trafficking of Shamima Begum into ISIS hands by Canadian intelligence, and the subsequent coverup by CSIS and MI6...

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/8/31/calls-for-inquiry-after-british-isil-bride-case-linked-to-canada

Edited by Bourbon Fox
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Salisbury Fox

Salisbury Fox

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Bourbon Fox said:

Appears to be confirmed by the US Security Council official, and the Ukrainian Pravda, which is Czech-owned and generally non-partisan

Ukraine is the one thing Johnson has got right, there is no negotiating with Putin unless you are willing to accept extremely poor terms and that there will be further territorial encroachments in the future. To not understand this is to not understand the Muscovite Mindset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bourbon Fox

Bourbon Fox

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

Ukraine is the one thing Johnson has got right, there is no negotiating with Putin unless you are willing to accept extremely poor terms and that there will be further territorial encroachments in the future. To not understand this is to not understand the Muscovite Mindset.

Hard to accept the last 5 months as being preferable to an early peace deal

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Salisbury Fox

Salisbury Fox

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bourbon Fox said:

Hard to accept the last 5 months as being preferable to an early peace deal

So you are happy for Russia to take Luhansk and Donbas as that would have been the only option that Russia would possibly accept at that point of time? Then you would have to be confident that they would not want more later like after the Crimea. The way Ukrainians are fighting suggests that they don’t need any other motivation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted
On 02/09/2022 at 16:52, yorkie1999 said:

You're joking, nasty little fvckers, they'll attack your kids in the middle of the night and eat all your chickens.

 

 

A pretty even fight, to be fair, until the referee intervened. But I'm giving it to the woman on points. :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bourbon Fox

Bourbon Fox

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Salisbury Fox said:

So you are happy for Russia to take Luhansk and Donbas as that would have been the only option that Russia would possibly accept at that point of time? Then you would have to be confident that they would not want more later like after the Crimea. The way Ukrainians are fighting suggests that they don’t need any other motivation.

How can I put this?

 

There are different ways to draw lines on a map of the region, if drawing lines must be done.

 

Quite a few of these imaginary lines - language spoken, political party voted for, preference for Eastern or Western political integration, historical cultural ties - split the country remarkably cleanly along the Austrian-Russian Imperial border, which dissolved over a century ago.

 

Nationally representative internal surveys by Ukrainian political scientists show 30-35% in favour of joining the Russian customs union along with Belarus and Kazakhstan, and 40-45% in favour of union with Europe. Again, the regional differences on this between Eastern and Western Ukraine are stark.

 

Indeed, etymologically 'Ukraine' has it roots in 'borderlands'. Ukraine as a freestanding state within its current imaginary lines has only existed for 31 years, since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Brief previous attempts at statehood over the previous few centuries were violently quashed by neighbours both East and West. 

 

There is no common cultural, religious or political identity that unites Ukraine, and there hasn't ever been: the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Russia, the Austrian empire, Greek Catholicism, Russian Orthodoxy - the region has been in conflict in kinetic or ideological terms since the 1500s at least.

 

What we have seen in Ukraine since 1991 is a continuation of this, outside actors from East and West deposing governments, fomenting unrest, conducting proxy war between factions. There are no innocents and no righteous actors on any side.

 

To talk of the will of 'Ukrainians' and to collectively refer to Ukrainians as fighting against Russia is at best clumsy, ill-informed, uncritical thinking and at worst propaganda of the type that you ridiculed in your first response. It ignores the fundamental need for open dialogue on the international stage about the future of the state of Ukraine and its people.

 

Powerful men drawing lines on a map.

Ordinary folk taking up arms and dying.

 

Forgive me for hoping that Johnson might have exhibited the global statesmanship that could have averted ongoing bloodshed in the region, and suffering across the continent from the economic impact of the war.

 

To say that he's 'got it right' would be to lend support to the disgusting supra-national global web of corporatocratic, financial, political, military and intelligence interests and agencies that control his actions and propagate global suffering in the interests of profit and power.

 

 

Edited by Bourbon Fox
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Salisbury Fox

Salisbury Fox

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Bourbon Fox said:

 

To talk of the will of 'Ukrainians' and to collectively refer to Ukrainians as fighting against Russia is at best clumsy, ill-informed, uncritical thinking and at worst propaganda of the type that you ridiculed in your first response. It ignores the fundamental need for open dialogue on the international stage about the future of the state of Ukraine and its people.

 

You could have at least answered my question before typing straight from Putin’s playbook. What open dialogue are you talking about anyway, the type seen at Mariupol or Bucha? What would have been acceptable terms for peace then? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bourbon Fox

Bourbon Fox

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Salisbury Fox said:

You could have at least answered my question before typing straight from Putin’s playbook. What open dialogue are you talking about anyway, the type seen at Mariupol or Bucha? What would have been acceptable terms for peace then? 

The themes and structure of my answer were largely gleaned from the work of Leonid Peisakhin.

 

He has political science degrees and doctorates from Harvard, Oxford, Yale and is currently Associate Professor of Political Science, New York University-Abu Dhabi. 

 

He has been published in the American Journal of Political Science, British Journal of Political Science, and the Journal of Law and Economics, but I mostly referenced an article published in the Washington Post.

 

I haven't seen him credited with co-writing the Putin Playbook, though?

 

To answer your question is very difficult of course, but I'm always naturally inclined towards government from the ground up. In a polar situation such as this one my instinct is that Ukraine as it exists today fails with a one-size-fits-all umbrella government and should probably consult the people on a federal or twin-state solution perhaps divided by the Dnipro. But asking a question doesn't entitle you to an answer, and my thoughts on a solution don't add to or take anything away from the validity of my previous post.

 

Mariupol, Bucha - yes, terrible things are happening. But they are happening on both sides, and with the most modern and comprehensive media warfare ever witnessed being aimed at us from 360 degrees, we cannot be sure of anything except that flesh and blood people are being harmed on a daily basis. Further reason to encourage negotiation, not end it.

 

I'm not a Russian sympathiser or apologist. The situation merits careful consideration and application of objective thought, not broad-stroke armchair punditry.

 

Edited by Bourbon Fox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Salisbury Fox

Salisbury Fox

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Bourbon Fox said:

The themes are structure of my answer were largely gleaned from the work of Leonid Peisakhin.

 

He has political science degrees and doctorates from Harvard, Oxford, Yale and is currently Associate Professor of Political Science, New York University-Abu Dhabi. 

 

He has been published in the American Journal of Political Science, British Journal of Political Science, and the Journal of Law and Economics, but I mostly referenced an article published in the Washington Post.

 

I haven't seen him credited with co-writing the Putin Playbook, though?

 

To answer your question is very difficult of course, but I'm always naturally inclined towards government from the ground up. In a polar situation such as this one my instinct is that Ukraine as it exists today fails with a one-size-fits-all umbrella government and should probably consult the people on a federal or twin-state solution perhaps divided by the Dnipro. But asking a question doesn't entitle you to an answer, and my thoughts on a solution don't add to or take anything away from the validity of my previous post.

 

Mariupol, Bucha - yes, terrible things are happening. But they are happening on both sides, and with the most modern and comprehensive media warfare ever witnessed being aimed at us from 360 degrees, we cannot be sure of anything except that flesh and blood people are being harmed on a daily basis.

 

I'm not a Russian sympathiser or apologist. The situation merits careful consideration and application of objective thought, not broad-stroke armchair punditry.

 

If asking a question doesn’t warrant an answer then I guess we have a different interpretation of what happens on a public forum. 
 

You are right that war tends to bring about war crimes, but Russian military doctrine is literally to use artillery indiscriminately and so to infer that there is a comparable standard would be frankly laughable if it wasn’t so distasteful. Also, trying to take Kyiv suggests that the intent was to take the whole country and not the parts you seem to think belong to Putin. 
 

I make no bones about where my sympathies lie and seeing as you are going to pretend that you are being balanced then I will end my input here as I am not going to waste any more of my time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bourbon Fox

Bourbon Fox

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

If asking a question doesn’t warrant an answer then I guess we have a different interpretation of what happens on a public forum. 
 

You are right that war tends to bring about war crimes, but Russian military doctrine is literally to use artillery indiscriminately and so to infer that there is a comparable standard would be frankly laughable if it wasn’t so distasteful. Also, trying to take Kyiv suggests that the intent was to take the whole country and not the parts you seem to think belong to Putin. 
 

I make no bones about where my sympathies lie and seeing as you are going to pretend that you are being balanced then I will end my input here as I am not going to waste any more of my time. 

Cheers then

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...