Jump to content

The Next President is...


disgruntledemployee

Recommended Posts


There is a growing argument for Salt based nuclear reactors being the only available means of scaling up electrical generation and the country investing the most in it... is China.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biden's Pick for Iran Envoy Resurrects Bitter Debate Over Nuclear Deal

Again, I did not like Trump but voted for him because of the damage the alternative would do and that is beginning to manifest itself.   Our new point man on Iran is Robert Malley.   If you don't now who Robert Malley is you might do a little research.  A an admittedly smart Rhodes Scholar, he has “a long track record of sympathy for the Iranian regime” and “animus towards Israel.”  When the New York Times publishes that his centrist critics describe him as "overly suspicious of American power and overly sympathetic to foreign actors including Iran and the Palestinians who have deep disputes with the West,"  you should know we have a problem.

I saw his handiwork up close and personal years ago and while I applause his willingness to talk to extreme groups like Hezzbolah because it shakes up the gridlock and the status quote, he leans far to the Iranian side of the argument and is willing to make concessions and agreements that we simply cannot verify with Iran.  The think tank he just left to take the position just published a paper saying we should immediately return to the Iran Deal, the problem is the Iranians have already begun enrichment of uranium to 20% purity, which is FAR beyond the allowed limit in the 2015 deal and it the lowest acceptable purity for nuclear weapons.

Iran ramps up uranium enrichment and seizes tanker as tensions rise with US

We are going to force Israel to go it alone and the result will not be pretty. 
 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Biden's Pick for Iran Envoy Resurrects Bitter Debate Over Nuclear Deal

Again, I did not like Trump but voted for him because of the damage the alternative would do and that is beginning to manifest itself.   Our new point man on Iran is Robert Malley.   If you don't now who Robert Malley is you might do a little research.  A an admittedly smart Rhodes Scholar, he has “a long track record of sympathy for the Iranian regime” and “animus towards Israel.”  When the New York Times publishes that his centrist critics describe him as "overly suspicious of American power and overly sympathetic to foreign actors including Iran and the Palestinians who have deep disputes with the West,"  you should know we have a problem.

I saw his handiwork up close and personal years ago and while I applause his willingness to talk to extreme groups like Hezzbolah because it shakes up the gridlock and the status quote, he leans far to the Iranian side of the argument and is willing to make concessions and agreements that we simply cannot verify with Iran.  The think tank he just left to take the position just published a paper saying we should immediately return to the Iran Deal, the problem is the Iranians have already begun enrichment of uranium to 20% purity, which is FAR beyond the allowed limit in the 2015 deal and it the lowest acceptable purity for nuclear weapons.

Iran ramps up uranium enrichment and seizes tanker as tensions rise with US

We are going to force Israel to go it alone and the result will not be pretty. 
 

Malley is a contrarian, who defaults to engagement-with-adversaries worldview  As a Middle East specialist, that’s where he executes this approach.  He also supported negotiations with North Korea, essentially agreeing with Trump.  
https://carnegieendowment.org/2017/08/07/how-trump-s-iran-threats-could-backfire-in-north-korea-pub-72751

He isn’t specifically or uniquely sympathetic to Iran. However, Iran sees itself as a major power broker and wants to be treated as such.  Robert Baer, a retired CIA officer, supports a similar approach. 

I don’t necessarily agree with this position, but it could be a viable approach.  Nothing else seems to be working. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Swamp Yankee said:

I don’t necessarily agree with this position, but it could be a viable approach.  Nothing else seems to be working. 

He was part of the Obama administration and his approach didn't work then...unless you count flying an airplane full of cash to Iran, allowing them to enrich and signing onto a restrictions we could not verify...

Great approach, maybe we should gas up another plane full of cash for the Mullahs. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once upon a time, the U.S. Senate was called the world’s greatest deliberative body. As envisioned by Thomas Jefferson, there were rules that protected the minority and allowed for thorough debate. Sadly, it appears this current Senate majority cares little for the precedents that earned the U.S. Senate that title. But some caution on their part might be well-advised self-interest; tables have been known to turn.

Harry Reid started it...McConnell Jammed it back down their throats and now Schumer toys with the idea of blowing up the legislative filibuster as well, he is potentially poised to first unravel another important — if lesser-known — Senate rule in pursuit of an all-encompassing COVID relief bill under the terms of “budget reconciliation.”

Democrats Flirt with Destroying Another Senate Guardrail

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

He was part of the Obama administration and his approach didn't work then...unless you count flying an airplane full of cash to Iran, allowing them to enrich and signing onto a restrictions we could not verify...

Great approach, maybe we should gas up another plane full of cash for the Mullahs. 

That’s not accurate, or at least complete.   The $ was released from an FMS account for undelivered military equipment in 1979. An MoU at the time stipulated that the funds were to be frozen in an interest-bearing account. In that sense, it was never our money to begin with.  That said, a argument could certainly be made that this was a valuable bargaining chip that could have been held back until a real concession was to be made.  The $1.3b interest was not accrued (although presumable realized) and thus had to be paid from the judgment fund. 
In a similar sense to the “Hillary sold uranium to the Russians” inaccurate simplification leads to inaccurate debate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CH, you can try to sit on your moral high horse and say Democrats are destroying the country. But you’re being super two faced about it, which I guess isn’t to be unexpected in today’s society.

Where were you two months ago when republicans tried to put regulations on Twitter into the Covid relief bill? Oh yeah, you support that.

Where were you last month when $1.375B of spending on the border wall was put into the Covid relief bill? Totally applicable, right?


 

Anyways, if you haven’t watched it yet, recommend everyone checks out the Social Dilemma. Explains how technology has made it so we, as a society, only see what we want to see. It’s why I’m so sure you’re wrong and you’re so sure I’m wrong.

Gives a strong case for civil war in the next 20 years, with really little recourse to bring us back to common ground. Really depressing if you’re into that sort of thing. Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Swamp Yankee said:

That’s not accurate, or at least complete.   The $ was released from an FMS account for undelivered military equipment in 1979. An MoU at the time stipulated that the funds were to be frozen in an interest-bearing account. In that sense, it was never our money to begin with.  That said, a argument could certainly be made that this was a valuable bargaining chip that could have been held back until a real concession was to be made.  The $1.3b interest was not accrued (although presumable realized) and thus had to be paid from the judgment fund. 
In a similar sense to the “Hillary sold uranium to the Russians” inaccurate simplification leads to inaccurate debate. 

Who fucking cares? 

We flew a plane full of cash to a country designated as a state sponsor of terrorism.

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that was supplying our enemies with EFPs that were used to kill and maim American Soldiers. 

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that supported various Iraqi Shia terrorist groups, including Kata’ib Hizballah (KH), Harakat al-Nujaba, and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq.  KH was responsible for a series of rocket attacks against American interests in Iraq, which culminated in the death of an American citizen following a 30 plus rocket barrage in December 2019.

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that supplied Hizballah with thousands of rockets, missiles, and small arms in direct violation of UNSCR 1701.  Hizballah has since rained those rockets on Israel killing many civilians.

We flew  plane full of cash to a country that provided support to Hamas and other designated Palestinian terrorist groups, including Palestine Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that continued supporting terrorist plots to attack Iranian dissidents in several countries in continental Europe.  In recent years, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Albania have all either arrested or expelled Iranian government officials implicated in various terrorist plots in their respective territories.

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that has used sponsored cyber attacks against foreign governments and private sector entities.

Come on Man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Negatory said:

CH, you can try to sit on your moral high horse and say Democrats are destroying the country. But you’re being super two faced about it, which I guess isn’t to be unexpected in today’s society.

Where were you two months ago when republicans tried to put regulations on Twitter into the Covid relief bill? Oh yeah, you support that.

Where were you last month when $1.375B of spending on the border wall was put into the Covid relief bill? Totally applicable, right?


 

Anyways, if you haven’t watched it yet, recommend everyone checks out the Social Dilemma. Explains how technology has made it so we, as a society, only see what we want to see. It’s why I’m so sure you’re wrong and you’re so sure I’m wrong.

Gives a strong case for civil war in the next 20 years, with really little recourse to bring us back to common ground. Really depressing if you’re into that sort of thing. Cheers!

So we are going to get personal...two faced and expected?  What moral high horse? 

Where did you see me support those legislative proposals?  You look stupid when you make shit up.

I didn't and don't support legislation with add-ons meant to push a political agenda.  Key policy issues like restrictions on social media should be decided independently, and with a LOT off discussion.  On the boarder wall issue, I was under the impression it was part of the infrastructure deal to create jobs, but again since it is a hot button issue I did not support it being in a COVID relief bill.

Standing by for an apology..

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2021 at 11:45 AM, ClearedHot said:

Who ing cares? 

We flew a plane full of cash to a country designated as a state sponsor of terrorism.

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that was supplying our enemies with EFPs that were used to kill and maim American Soldiers. 

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that supported various Iraqi Shia terrorist groups, including Kata’ib Hizballah (KH), Harakat al-Nujaba, and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq.  KH was responsible for a series of rocket attacks against American interests in Iraq, which culminated in the death of an American citizen following a 30 plus rocket barrage in December 2019.

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that supplied Hizballah with thousands of rockets, missiles, and small arms in direct violation of UNSCR 1701.  Hizballah has since rained those rockets on Israel killing many civilians.

We flew  plane full of cash to a country that provided support to Hamas and other designated Palestinian terrorist groups, including Palestine Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that continued supporting terrorist plots to attack Iranian dissidents in several countries in continental Europe.  In recent years, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Albania have all either arrested or expelled Iranian government officials implicated in various terrorist plots in their respective territories.

We flew a plane full of cash to a country that has used sponsored cyber attacks against foreign governments and private sector entities.

Come on Man.

I'm not arguing the threat Iran poses or the bad actions it has perpetrated.  I am pointing out that simplistic, imcomplete explanations leads to poor understanding. 

Both sides do this, but the right mainstream media is often the culprit. Simple, red-meat soundbites that are easily digested and used to sway public opinion.  We're being treated as if we can't handle the details which provide a deeper understand of our internal political mechanisms; some of which we can change with our vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2021 at 9:23 AM, ClearedHot said:

I've clearly stated I think climate change is real and we need to do something, but this is not the thing, this is a political stunt that does far more harm than good. 

I am in favor of actual investments in science not a move that placates the wacky far left and costs thousands of jobs while doing more hard to the environment. 

How about we use some of that unity we were promised  built a real bipartisan national strategy to reduce emissions and convert to renewables before we wreck the American economy.  Neither side will be happy int he short-term, but that probably means we have a real solution.  Instead we have an out of touch administration playing to the extremes.  What a great narrative when John "Climate Change Czar" took his private jet to the climate change summit and said displaced Keystone Pipeline workers "will have better choices” and can “go to work to make the solar panels.”  Huh...over 60% of solar panel production is in China...come on man.  We are years away from increasing efficiency and increasing large scale solar panel production here in the U.S. at a competitive price point.  These people need jobs NOW.  Oh and he made those clueless comments while defending his use of the private jet... "The only choice for somebody like me"  Come on man!

 

Sadly, unity at this point is an antiquated concept.  Our previous president in 2016 won by nearly the same electoral margin (77 vs 74) and a smaller popular vote margin than Biden, yet proceeded forth as if he had a commanding mandate.  Energy independence needs to be our primary goal.  Without that, national security will be at risk. Second is sustainability through diversification.  As we're witnessing to some degree in TX, limiting power generation sources can have dramatic effects if a primary source is compromised (e.g. icing on wind turbines are a contributing complication ).  Greater diversification is our realistic path to a cleaner overall footprint as we can have multiple renewal resources along with fossil fuels and nuclear. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  As we're witnessing to some degree in TX, limiting power generation sources can have dramatic effects if a primary source is compromised (e.g. icing on wind turbines are a contributing complication ).  Greater diversification is our realistic path to a cleaner overall footprint as we can have multiple renewal resources along with fossil fuels and nuclear. 


Generally agree, but Texas isn't having problems due to icing on windmills, they are having problems systemically, largely due to multiple sources of power struggling, particularly their main source of power (natural gas).


On Monday, frozen instruments and a limited gas supply forced 30,000 MW/h of power offline. This was half of what ERCOT believed they would need. According to the agency, wind turbines account for less than 13% of the total generation that was lost. The majority of which was coal and gas.

In October 2020, the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported that renewables generated 22% of the state’s energy, while gas generated 51.8%.

https://www.wkrg.com/news/are-frozen-wind-turbines-to-blame-for-texas-power-outages/amp/


Officials for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which manages most of Texas’ grid, said the primary cause of the outages Tuesday appeared to be the state’s natural gas providers. Many are not designed to withstand such low temperatures on equipment or during production.
...
It’s estimated that about 80% of the grid’s capacity, or 67 gigawatts, could be generated by natural gas, coal and some nuclear power. Only 7% of ERCOT’s forecasted winter capacity, or 6 gigawatts, was expected to come from various wind power sources across the state.
...
Texas does not have as much storage capacity as other states, experts said, because the resource-laden state can easily pull it from the ground when it’s needed — usually.

[/Quote]
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/02/16/natural-gas-power-storm/amp/

So yeah, icing on the windmills is a problem. But it's only a small part of a much larger problem. Bigger issues in Texas are natural gas plants ability to stay online in the cold, and Texas' decision to isolate it's grid from the rest of the nation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Swamp Yankee said:

Sadly, unity at this point is an antiquated concept.  Our previous president in 2016 won by nearly the same electoral margin (77 vs 74) and a smaller popular vote margin than Biden, yet proceeded forth as if he had a commanding mandate.  Energy independence needs to be our primary goal.  Without that, national security will be at risk. Second is sustainability through diversification.  As we're witnessing to some degree in TX, limiting power generation sources can have dramatic effects if a primary source is compromised (e.g. icing on wind turbines are a contributing complication ).  Greater diversification is our realistic path to a cleaner overall footprint as we can have multiple renewal resources along with fossil fuels and nuclear. 

Sadly most folks on both sides don't realize how the price of oil impacts every part of our economy.  Killing Keystone is more than just driving up gas prices, it will impact production of goods and services throughout our economy.  I know we have a problem with emissions and we need to take action but the Biden approach is as dangerous to our way of life as the Trump approach pretending there is no problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

I wonder what the Vegas Over/Under is how many days Biden lasts as President.  NO WAY Biden makes the full four years with Kamala waiting in the wings to invoke the 25th? 

Dude is a mess.

Biden Falsely Claims: ‘We Didn’t Have’ A Vaccine ‘When We Came Into Office’

My assumption is the entire Democratic Party will work together to keep the "Weekend at Bernie's Biden's" game going until the 2022 midterms (21 months away from now).  After that, who knows.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Sadly most folks on both sides don't realize how the price of oil impacts every part of our economy.  Killing Keystone is more than just driving up gas prices, it will impact production of goods and services throughout our economy.  I know we have a problem with emissions and we need to take action but the Biden approach is as dangerous to our way of life as the Trump approach pretending there is no problem.

It’s going to take some compromise, which is the practical possibly-attainable version of unity.  Liberals have to accept that not every acre of uninhabited land will be kept pristine.  Conservatives have to accept that there will need to be private $spent on reasonable measures to mitigate pollution and ensure robustness.  I say that as someone who on one hand hunts/camps/kayaks and on the other started and succeeded with multiple tech businesses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Blue said:

My assumption is the entire Democratic Party will work together to keep the "Weekend at Bernie's Biden's" game going until the 2022 midterms (21 months away from now).  After that, 

7 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

I wonder what the Vegas Over/Under is how many days Biden lasts as President.  NO WAY Biden makes the full four years with Kamala waiting in the wings to invoke the 25th? 

Dude is a mess.

Biden Falsely Claims: ‘We Didn’t Have’ A Vaccine ‘When We Came Into Office’

Now we need an actual moderate outsider-style candidate. Trump as a first attempt failed.  Tulsi?
Someone from the Republican Tuesday Group? Heck, Jocko or Dwayne Johnson? (half-kidding)   Someone who can deftly broker compromise.   Neither side should expect to get everything they want if we want to get actual shit done  

 

Edited by Swamp Yankee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Swamp Yankee said:

 

People laugh but I would love to see a split ticket as the third party in the next POTUS election.    
 

Tulsi (D) with Crenshaw (R) or Haley (R) for example.  
 

Completely bi-partisan and able to pull the more independent and centrist votes away from the two major parties.  

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tank said:

People laugh but I would love to see a split ticket as the third party in the next POTUS election.    
 

Tulsi (D) with Crenshaw (R) or Haley (R) for example.  
 

Completely bi-partisan and able to pull the more independent and centrist votes away from the two major parties.  

Except that a split ticket with a Democrat for VP and Republican for President is just a Republican ticket, and vice versa. Especially if the person on the presidential line is reasonably healthy. Tons of VPs have thought they were going to influence policy, and besides Cheney I can't think of any who actually have.

A viable VP candidate joining a split ticket is basically taking all their future political ambitions and flushing them down the toilet.

Edited by Stoker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Stoker said:

Except that a split ticket with a Democrat for VP and Republican for President is just a Republican ticket, and vice versa. Especially if the person on the presidential line is reasonably healthy. Tons of VPs have thought they were going to influence policy, and besides Cheney I can't think of any who actually have.

A viable VP candidate joining a split ticket is basically taking all their future political ambitions and flushing them down the toilet.

For someone like Tulsi that may be okay. Likely no future in the way left turning democrat party and if she wants to keep the D by her name (sts) she wouldn’t be able to go through the Republican primaries to get nominated. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, jazzdude said:

 


Generally agree, but Texas isn't having problems due to icing on windmills, they are having problems systemically, largely due to multiple sources of power struggling, particularly their main source of power (natural gas).


https://www.wkrg.com/news/are-frozen-wind-turbines-to-blame-for-texas-power-outages/amp/
 

 

Point taken and I stand corrected. It isn't a single-point-of-failure situation.  Seems like part of the problem is lack of a requirement to harden the grid.  On one hand, you could pose an argument that a largely deregulated power system is partially to blame.  Specifically, insufficient reserve margin to deal with crises and the approach that excess energy needs are filled via the open market, with huge per kW price swings:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/17/how-the-texas-power-grid-failed-and-what-could-stop-it-from-happening-again.html

On the other hand, perhaps the cost to build administrative and physical infrastructures for these "once-in-a-lifetime" events just isn't worth it to many. 

That said, I can't help but notice that several "once-in-a-lifetime-events" have happened during my middle-aged life.  

 

Edited by Swamp Yankee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point taken and I stand corrected. It isn't a single-point-of-failure situation.  Seems like part of the problem is lack of a requirement to harden the grid.  On one hand, you could pose an argument that a largely deregulated power system is partially to blame.  Specifically, insufficient reserve margin to deal with crises and the approach that excess energy needs are filled via the open market, with huge per kW price swings:
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/17/how-the-texas-power-grid-failed-and-what-could-stop-it-from-happening-again.html
On the other hand, perhaps the cost to build administrative and physical infrastructures for these "once-in-a-lifetime" events just isn't worth it to many. 
That said, I can't help but notice that several "once-in-a-lifetime-events" have happened during my middle-aged life.  
 


Yeah, it's interesting. I guess Texas had something similar happen back in 2011, and appears to have done nothing to improve in a decade.

It's all just risk management. Texas choose to be deregulated for their power, and it's paying the price for it now (instead of an upfront monetary investment to avoid these situations).

This might be a once in lifetime event, but that doesn't mean it's unprecedented. Same with areas with earthquakes and strict building codes, or areas with volcanic activity having evacuation plans. Prior planning prevents piss poor performance...

And you're right, there really isn't a business case for extreme events. Even if there's a fine or penalty. Unless you start throwing business leaders in jail for failing to protect the public in their public infrastructure monopoly, we have to rely on the business to "do the right thing" for the public.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...