Taliban resurgence (and consequences of such) thread

[cr47t]

so i'm pretty sure you've all heard about this, but after looking at this article i'm wanting to hear you all's thoughts \

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-08-14/the-taliban-is-already-inspiring-terror-beyond-afghanistan-it-will-only-spread

my take: this is obviously bad news, but the bloomberg article makes me concerned that we're going to have to head back in when it seemed assured just a week or two ago that we can relax it's almost ove- oh shit the danger is more real? now that i think about it i'm kinda stumped how biden, trump, or others overseeing the decline in US troops didnt see this coming; my mind flashes back to a friend of mine who was critical of obama for withdrawing troops when we had isis "in a corner, now they've got more wiggle room due to the US withdrawal" (paraphrased). maybe his point isn't dated...

note: use of this thread for unrelated-to-topic potshots against political bogeymen or common targets will not be tolerated, regardless of who's on what 'side'

[Horu]

While this concerns me, I'm gonna leave it on the back burner unless my orders get overturned and I have to return to action. But right now, it isn't my job to care unless it reaches the US border and becomes an immediate threat to myself, my family, neighbors and friends.

[Horu]

[Horu]

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

@Horu

explain to me why you're so against sources but you repetitively use tik tok videos without any concrete information or fact check or context?

[Horu]

4 minutes ago, The Immaculate Lord CowCow said:

@Horu

explain to me why you're so against sources but you repetitively use tik tok videos without any concrete information or fact check or context?

Isn't live footage better than a narrative being pushed by secondary media?

 

Edit: Besides, he is only discussing the joke of a president that opted to listen to terrorists instead of finding his spine and telling them to take their demands and shove it.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

1 hour ago, Horu said:

Isn't live footage better than a narrative being pushed by secondary media?

 

Edit: Besides, he is only discussing the joke of a president that opted to listen to terrorists instead of finding his spine and telling them to take their demands and shove it.

Live footage that is just a single person pushing a narrative without elaboration? If I walked up to someone and told them what to think it's not any better just because I said it directly to them.

Also, you really shouldn't do that "he is only ____" stuff anymore in debates. You've been told off for trying to do that so many times. It's never followed by anything but heavily biased attempts at disses.

[Horu]

22 minutes ago, The Immaculate Lord CowCow said:

Live footage that is just a single person pushing a narrative without elaboration? If I walked up to someone and told them what to think it's not any better just because I said it directly to them.

Also, you really shouldn't do that "he is only ____" stuff anymore in debates. You've been told off for trying to do that so many times. It's never followed by anything but heavily biased attempts at disses.

Also, I posted the video because I was scrolling through tiktok and came across the videos. I simply posted the videos without pushing my own narrative.

And I didn't use the "he was just...." argument here. I was simply stating what he was obviously doing.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

11 hours ago, Horu said:

Also, I posted the video because I was scrolling through tiktok and came across the videos. I simply posted the videos without pushing my own narrative.

And I didn't use the "he was just...." argument here. I was simply stating what he was obviously doing.

If you were "simply stating what he was obviously doing" you would have at most said "he was talking about Biden" and you did not. In fact you literally just did "was just" again in your reply, starting to think it's a habit you can't quit.

Meanwhile I wasn't talking about YOU pushing a narrative, but the person speaking has a clear narrative and he ignores a lot of context. (Such as how the equipment left was stuff previously given to the afghan army to fight back and they, well, simply did not fight back and so it wasn't "biden leaving it for the taliban" as they imply)

Basically these videos had even less to them than the articles you hate yet you're fine with them because....idk, you like them.

[Horu]

36 minutes ago, The Immaculate Lord CowCow said:

If you were "simply stating what he was obviously doing" you would have at most said "he was talking about Biden" and you did not. In fact you literally just did "was just" again in your reply, starting to think it's a habit you can't quit.

Meanwhile I wasn't talking about YOU pushing a narrative, but the person speaking has a clear narrative and he ignores a lot of context. (Such as how the equipment left was stuff previously given to the afghan army to fight back and they, well, simply did not fight back and so it wasn't "biden leaving it for the taliban" as they imply)

Basically these videos had even less to them than the articles you hate yet you're fine with them because....idk, you like them.

Nope. Cause he clearly states that the leadership/presidentbis a joke.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

14 minutes ago, Horu said:

Nope. Cause he clearly states that the leadership/presidentbis a joke.

He was not, as you said, "only discussing the joke of a president that opted to listen to terrorists instead of finding his spine and telling them to take their demands and shove it."

not only was that not only what he was saying but also you added your own feelings into it.

Ergo, no, you were not "simply stating" or "only discussing" or anything of that sort.

You continue to hide behind "Oh I'm not doing this I'm just saying" in order to get away with insults in the guise of "objective facts". If you can't stop doing that then you probably shouldn't try and debate anything. Because it really doesn't add anything and only looks like you want to mock someone/something while trying not to be upfront about it.

Try to find more sources and information if you want to make a point. Or if you want to discuss what's being said...add your own thoughts and stick by them.

[Phantom Roxas]

2 hours ago, The Immaculate Lord CowCow said:

Basically these videos had even less to them than the articles you hate yet you're fine with them because....idk, you like them.

The TikTok videos are "just memes" in his opinion, even though they are telling a narrative. The difference is that when he's complaining about articles, he assumes some anti-Republican "propaganda" within the articles. If a TikTok video features anyone criticizing Democrats, however, that wouldn't bother him. If someone is pushing, shall we say, "anti-Democrat propaganda", then Horu would roll with it.

Live footage isn't exactly better than a narrative when it's live footage of someone pushing a narrative.

1 hour ago, The Immaculate Lord CowCow said:

You continue to hide behind "Oh I'm not doing this I'm just saying" in order to get away with insults in the guise of "objective facts". If you can't stop doing that then you probably shouldn't try and debate anything. Because it really doesn't add anything and only looks like you want to mock someone/something while trying not to be upfront about it.

Try to find more sources and information if you want to make a point. Or if you want to discuss what's being said...add your own thoughts and stick by them.

It's moments like this that reaffirm my belief that the people who are the most obsessed with styling themselves as more "objective" than anyone else actually couldn't possibly care less about objectivity. They just want their personal beliefs to be accepted as an absolute fact, which is why they spend more time claiming to be "just saying" something is true. However, they don't actually do anything whatsoever to back up their positions. It shifts the burden onto the other parties in the debate to prove them wrong, while the "objective" person refuses every opportunity to prove why they are right.

The strategy is just to say that you're right, and that you're just being objective when saying as much. Everyone saying you're right is just caught up in silly things like "feelings" or "opinions", which the objective person is totally not indulging at all.

[Horu]

7 hours ago, Phantom Roxas said:

The TikTok videos are "just memes" in his opinion, even though they are telling a narrative. The difference is that when he's complaining about articles, he assumes some anti-Republican "propaganda" within the articles. If a TikTok video features anyone criticizing Democrats, however, that wouldn't bother him. If someone is pushing, shall we say, "anti-Democrat propaganda", then Horu would roll with it.

Live footage isn't exactly better than a narrative when it's live footage of someone pushing a narrative.

It's moments like this that reaffirm my belief that the people who are the most obsessed with styling themselves as more "objective" than anyone else actually couldn't possibly care less about objectivity. They just want their personal beliefs to be accepted as an absolute fact, which is why they spend more time claiming to be "just saying" something is true. However, they don't actually do anything whatsoever to back up their positions. It shifts the burden onto the other parties in the debate to prove them wrong, while the "objective" person refuses every opportunity to prove why they are right.

The strategy is just to say that you're right, and that you're just being objective when saying as much. Everyone saying you're right is just caught up in silly things like "feelings" or "opinions", which the objective person is totally not indulging at all.

"Joke of a leader"

The footage is quite telling. Isn't it? And this applies to this topic since they are discussing the events taking place in the Middle East.

[Phantom Roxas]

Biden's speech was tame. Hardly impressive, but really not worth getting so worked up about.

The second video is Kevin McCarthy complaining, and let's be honest, it's only because Biden is a Democrat. Unless I missed something, that one didn't have any footage of Biden. Forgive me, I assumed you were talking up live footage because you prefer live footage of the President actually doing something wrong.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/kevin-mccarthy-can-t-make-his-mind-troops-afghanistan-n1278009

This article is a direct response to McCarthy, and since that second video didn't include any live footage of Biden, which seemed to be enough for you, I think your standard isn't actually live footage, but who is complaining about which politician.

The crux of the article is that McCarthy is a hypocrite, because he keeps flipping his position. He was all in favor of making a deal when Trump did it, but is suddenly against making deals when Biden does it. You can split hairs over why the terms of Trump's deals were good and Biden's deal is bad, but we would be wasting our time, because the terms would not have been a factor to McCarthy. Trump is a Republican, so McCarthy is going to support him, and Biden is a Democrat, so McCarthy is going to hate everything he does, even if Biden and Trump were to do exactly the same thing.

"The House Republican leader's difficulties in articulating a coherent position underscore an important truth: Criticizing the Biden administration is easy; articulating a clear alternative policy is hard.

It's a task McCarthy seems eager, but unable, to tackle. In fact, at this point, it seems the Californian's principal goal is to simply take cheap shots at President Joe Biden, even when he agrees with him."

Huh, something about taking cheap shots at someone even when you agree with them feels... familiar, somehow.

It's almost like posting footage of McCarthy complaining about Biden is worthless because McCarthy can't make up his own position on this. McCarthy is only complaining because a Democrat president is doing this, not because he actually disagrees with the actions being taken.

tl;dr: All you're offering to this conversation is showing that people don't like Biden, and not actually explaining why his actions are good or bad. The substance of their arguments doesn't seem to matter to you so much as whether they're criticizing as Biden at all.

[Horu]

4 hours ago, Phantom Roxas said:

Biden's speech was tame. Hardly impressive, but really not worth getting so worked up about.

The second video is Kevin McCarthy complaining, and let's be honest, it's only because Biden is a Democrat. Unless I missed something, that one didn't have any footage of Biden. Forgive me, I assumed you were talking up live footage because you prefer live footage of the President actually doing something wrong.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/kevin-mccarthy-can-t-make-his-mind-troops-afghanistan-n1278009

This article is a direct response to McCarthy, and since that second video didn't include any live footage of Biden, which seemed to be enough for you, I think your standard isn't actually live footage, but who is complaining about which politician.

The crux of the article is that McCarthy is a hypocrite, because he keeps flipping his position. He was all in favor of making a deal when Trump did it, but is suddenly against making deals when Biden does it. You can split hairs over why the terms of Trump's deals were good and Biden's deal is bad, but we would be wasting our time, because the terms would not have been a factor to McCarthy. Trump is a Republican, so McCarthy is going to support him, and Biden is a Democrat, so McCarthy is going to hate everything he does, even if Biden and Trump were to do exactly the same thing.

"The House Republican leader's difficulties in articulating a coherent position underscore an important truth: Criticizing the Biden administration is easy; articulating a clear alternative policy is hard.

It's a task McCarthy seems eager, but unable, to tackle. In fact, at this point, it seems the Californian's principal goal is to simply take cheap shots at President Joe Biden, even when he agrees with him."

Huh, something about taking cheap shots at someone even when you agree with them feels... familiar, somehow.

It's almost like posting footage of McCarthy complaining about Biden is worthless because McCarthy can't make up his own position on this. McCarthy is only complaining because a Democrat president is doing this, not because he actually disagrees with the actions being taken.

tl;dr: All you're offering to this conversation is showing that people don't like Biden, and not actually explaining why his actions are good or bad. The substance of their arguments doesn't seem to matter to you so much as whether they're criticizing as Biden at all.

Great job at listening to the real problem of Biden negotiating with terrorists and being a spineless coward and us losing $85 billion worth of military equipment because of Biden's negligence. Instead you took the "He's mad at Biden because he's a democrat" when he doesn't even mention Biden's political status once in the speech. He is mad cause Biden literally gave the Taliban a fucking hitlist and $85 million in military equipment because he opted to back down and comply with terrorist demands.

[cr47t]

On 8/31/2021 at 4:59 PM, Horu said:

He is mad cause Biden literally gave the Taliban a fucking hitlist and $85 million in military equipment because he opted to back down and comply with terrorist demands.

source and/or context please? and by that i mean, do better than what you've been called out for in this thread already