Viva Le Pen
Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 12:44 pm
Might as well have a thread for the next big win.
That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://www.octopusoverlords.com/forum/
Holman wrote:I know fascists make you happy, but Le Pen is unlikely to be the next President of France.
France has a robust multi-party system, so even if Le Pen wins the first round (as polls suggest she can), she won't get a clear majority. The first round will be followed by a run-off between the top two vote-getters, and all of the other parties will coalesce behind her opponent against her racist National Front.
Also, "Viva" is not French; it's Spanish. Please produce your papers for the Deportation Squad.
So Rip is rooting for the openly fascist pro-Putin anti-NATO candidate now. Trump had better up his game if he wants to stay current.Rip wrote:Holman wrote:I know fascists make you happy, but Le Pen is unlikely to be the next President of France.
France has a robust multi-party system, so even if Le Pen wins the first round (as polls suggest she can), she won't get a clear majority. The first round will be followed by a run-off between the top two vote-getters, and all of the other parties will coalesce behind her opponent against her racist National Front.
Also, "Viva" is not French; it's Spanish. Please produce your papers for the Deportation Squad.
Yep.Now watch a Soviet cartoon which eerily predicted the realities of rising European fascism when Soviet style communism was removed from the continent.
Trump: I’m not endorsing Le Pen, but she’s "strongest on what's been going on in France”
This site has links to RT, the Kremlin propaganda arm in the West, and to everyone's favorite, Alex Jones. One of their more recent angles is propagating the idea that the Syria chemical attack was a false flag operation.
Like I said, just like Alex Jones, Rip sees himself as a performance artist. The article he posted actually waxed poetic about when Soviet communism permeated Europe, wtf has happened to conservatives to sell their souls like this? There is NO line Trump can cross short of changing party that will revoke Rip's support unless doing so will get a bunch of us up in arms. Rip, if I am wrong, please let us know what the trigger points are for you to stop supporting Trump.Grifman wrote:This site has links to RT, the Kremlin propaganda arm in the West, and to everyone's favorite, Alex Jones. One of their more recent angles is propagating the idea that the Syria chemical attack was a false flag operation.
So yeah, I'm on board, Rip.
In truth, they (Trump and Rip and their ilk) have already changed party, haven't they? People that seek to cozy up to Putin and wax poetic about Soviet Communism are not Republican.Enough wrote:Like I said, just like Alex Jones, Rip sees himself as a performance artist. The article he posted actually waxed poetic about when Soviet communism permeated Europe, wtf has happened to conservatives to sell their souls like this? There is NO line Trump can cross short of changing party that will revoke Rip's support unless doing so will get a bunch of us up in arms. Rip, if I am wrong, please let us know what the trigger points are for you to stop supporting Trump.Grifman wrote:This site has links to RT, the Kremlin propaganda arm in the West, and to everyone's favorite, Alex Jones. One of their more recent angles is propagating the idea that the Syria chemical attack was a false flag operation.
So yeah, I'm on board, Rip.
It's not the communism, it's the nativist authoritarian kleptocracy.Kurth wrote:In truth, they (Trump and Rip and their ilk) have already changed party, haven't they? People that seek to cozy up to Putin and wax poetic about Soviet Communism are not Republican.
Then how do you support Le Pen?Rip wrote:Not sure how I am aligning with Putin. I haven't advocated giving him an inch. In fact I advocate the opposite, I believe we need to kick Russia in the teeth a couple times and force them give back Crimea.
But sure whatever you guys want to think, run with that.
Right, sanctions have no effect.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
Why don't we ask NK, or Iran, etc.Enough wrote:Right, sanctions have no effect.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
Sanctions can have various levels of success and there are great arguments about whether they are always appropriate just like we can make great arguments whether war is always the right answer... duh. But jebus dude this is basic math even if their economic/diplomatic efforts opposed to Russia only provide a 10-30% benefit. La Pen (besides being on Putin's payroll) wants to destroy the western alliance that is one of the world's best checks against Putin, she actively wants to make the world a better place for the expansion of Russian power and is even down with letting them take other countries unchallenged. This shit is anathema to what Reagan and decades of "strong on defense" conservatives stood for, but I guess those days are gone.Rip wrote:Why don't we ask NK, or Iran, etc.Enough wrote:Right, sanctions have no effect.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
You might ask yourself why the most stridently nativist, racist parties across Europe are so pro-Putin.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
So your argument is that without the EU, Russia takes over much of Europe?Enough wrote:Sanctions can have various levels of success and there are great arguments about whether they are always appropriate just like we can make great arguments whether war is always the right answer... duh. But jebus dude this is basic math even if their economic/diplomatic efforts opposed to Russia only provide a 10-30% benefit. La Pen (besides being on Putin's payroll) wants to destroy the western alliance that is one of the world's best checks against Putin, she actively wants to make the world a better place for the expansion of Russian power and is even down with letting them take other countries unchallenged. This shit is anathema to what Reagan and decades of "strong on defense" conservatives stood for, but I guess those days are gone.Rip wrote:Why don't we ask NK, or Iran, etc.Enough wrote:Right, sanctions have no effect.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
You're grasping at straws. It's so simple. Le Pen is clearly on balance worse for the US, worse for Europe and better for Russia and the racists.Rip wrote:So your argument is that without the EU, Russia takes over much of Europe?Enough wrote:Sanctions can have various levels of success and there are great arguments about whether they are always appropriate just like we can make great arguments whether war is always the right answer... duh. But jebus dude this is basic math even if their economic/diplomatic efforts opposed to Russia only provide a 10-30% benefit. La Pen (besides being on Putin's payroll) wants to destroy the western alliance that is one of the world's best checks against Putin, she actively wants to make the world a better place for the expansion of Russian power and is even down with letting them take other countries unchallenged. This shit is anathema to what Reagan and decades of "strong on defense" conservatives stood for, but I guess those days are gone.Rip wrote:Why don't we ask NK, or Iran, etc.Enough wrote:Right, sanctions have no effect.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
Does the leader of France get to decide who Russia takes over or doesn't?
The reality is that Russia takes over whatever Russia wants until they believe someone will make them pay a price they are unwilling to pay. Hint: The price is measured in lives not Rubbles.
Russia never would have gotten near Crimea in the first place if they had thought we would start blowing shit up over it. They knew we wouldn't, so they did.
Sanctions have never gotten a country to give back seized land, they never will.
Was there a reason you restricted this to Europe?Holman wrote:You might ask yourself why the most stridently nativist, racist parties across Europe are so pro-Putin.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
It's not just Le Pen's National Front.
Authoritarianism -- because that's what we're really talking about, not just pro- or anti-Putin -- is on the rise worldwide. The president of the USA just congratulated the new dictator of Turkey for wiping out democracy, fer cryin out loud. If France falls, then Germany is the last bulwark against the rise of neo-fascism. Which might be the most ironic sentence I've ever written.Enough wrote:Was there a reason you restricted this to Europe?Holman wrote:You might ask yourself why the most stridently nativist, racist parties across Europe are so pro-Putin.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
It's not just Le Pen's National Front.
But you supported Trump who wanted to be best buds with Putin.Rip wrote:Not sure how I am aligning with Putin. I haven't advocated giving him an inch. In fact I advocate the opposite, I believe we need to kick Russia in the teeth a couple times and force them give back Crimea.
But sure whatever you guys want to think, run with that.
Show me how short of war anyone can force Russia to give back the Crimea.Rip wrote:SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
So the US should have gone to war over the Crimea?Rip wrote:Russia never would have gotten near Crimea in the first place if they had thought we would start blowing shit up over it. They knew we wouldn't, so they did.
Well a lot of people in France don't think it is simple just like a lot of people here didn't.Enough wrote:You're grasping at straws. It's so simple. Le Pen is clearly on balance worse for the US, worse for Europe and better for Russia and the racists.Rip wrote:So your argument is that without the EU, Russia takes over much of Europe?Enough wrote:Sanctions can have various levels of success and there are great arguments about whether they are always appropriate just like we can make great arguments whether war is always the right answer... duh. But jebus dude this is basic math even if their economic/diplomatic efforts opposed to Russia only provide a 10-30% benefit. La Pen (besides being on Putin's payroll) wants to destroy the western alliance that is one of the world's best checks against Putin, she actively wants to make the world a better place for the expansion of Russian power and is even down with letting them take other countries unchallenged. This shit is anathema to what Reagan and decades of "strong on defense" conservatives stood for, but I guess those days are gone.Rip wrote:Why don't we ask NK, or Iran, etc.Enough wrote:Right, sanctions have no effect.Rip wrote:She is wrong on Crimea.
All politicians have things they are wrong on.
In the end there is no material difference between her position and the people that think the opposite yet have no intention of actually doing anything about it but complaing. SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
Does the leader of France get to decide who Russia takes over or doesn't?
The reality is that Russia takes over whatever Russia wants until they believe someone will make them pay a price they are unwilling to pay. Hint: The price is measured in lives not Rubbles.
Russia never would have gotten near Crimea in the first place if they had thought we would start blowing shit up over it. They knew we wouldn't, so they did.
Sanctions have never gotten a country to give back seized land, they never will.
Rip wrote:
Democracy on the other hand is simple. Trump won, she will win
He basically already admitted he either wants to support very pro-Putin politicos or ones who will go to war with Russia over Crimea, but dammit not anything in between. It's all so logical.Grifman wrote:Show me how short of war anyone can force Russia to give back the Crimea.Rip wrote:SHow me someone who supports forcing Russia to give Crimea back and I might change positions.
Thanks, I was a bit too lazy to not make this response but it's clearly true, though slightly less so with higher oil prices.Holman wrote:Sanctions ARE working. No, they're not getting Crimea back--not yet anyway--but the Russian economy is suffering. State industries are suffering particularly. Specific oligarchs are suffering personally. The Russian anti-corruption movement is growing, and it's not impossible that Russians might force reforms from the bottom up. Given that the alternative is war with the world's largest nuclear power, patience and steadfastness are worth the effort just as they were in the late 1980s.
Of course all this would be more effective if Trump and his cronies weren't pushing as hard as they can to give the oligarchs relief in exchange for their own fat slices of Russian criminal/energy-sector pie.
Oh there you go again bringing up those 2.8 million fraudulent votes.Holman wrote:Rip wrote:
Democracy on the other hand is simple. Trump won, she will win
Notez s'il vous plaît: in France the losing candidate actually doesn't take office.