This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Ukrainians did that. But I advocate the US government destroying Russian pipelines. Not all of them all at once, but little by little to help wean Europeans off if Russian fuel. The pipelines are impossible to defend. Every now and then a bomb could go off or the pressure could be set wrong causing an explosion and the US could deny responsibility.
This happened back in the Cold War. Every now and then misfortune would strike an oil pipe. Turns out it was the CIA.
Allow me to be skeptical about that. The explosions were very powerful, on the order of useful load for a yacht that size. It smells of a cover story, really.
Don't you think it's up to Europeans to decide who they're going to buy fuel from ?
Are you not worried this kind of thing could result in drones randomly blowing up US nat-gas liquefaction facilities. Attacks on infrastructure are not a good idea, not against people with means.
Especially seeing as US border is pretty much unsecured, US has hugely long coasts and there's a lot of ship traffic and all that.
Russia endlessly attacks Ukrainian infrastructure. It appears to be a great idea and in fact key to winning wars.
Pipelines are entirely undefesible. So let's say any nation with the desire has a veto on this decision.
And yes, Europe is the most feckless and counterproductive allies the US could have. A parasite society hiding under our defense umbrella, using our hard-found pharmaceuticals without paying to support them and endlessly funding our enemies.
Who would be drone bombing American LNG plants? Not Europe for sure. We've seen their complete inability and extreme passivity in this conflict. You think Russia would do it? I suppose it is possible. But the US has historically been extremely shielded from direct counterattack like that. 9/11 being the one exception.
Ukraine is a poor corrupt country with very little means of retaliating. Russia provides up to 10% of world's material inputs in most cases. I don't even mention that it has a steel and chemicals industry with output on par with WW2 US. And that it's currently apparently outproducing NATO as Ukraine is .. not doing very well on the artillery front, and NATO has little reason to hold back artillery and shell production seeing as the next war is a naval and air war against China,where artillery is of little to no use.
Wars. Do you understand what a 'war' is? Attacking infrastructure, outside of a war situation, risks that it becomes a war.
Nice trolling, but the biggest trade partner of China is the United States. Also Europe isn't funding Iran or North Korea - Iran is mainly funding itself with its oil revenue.
You forgot that WTC was bombed, that Muslim terrorists almost blew up a dozen airliners, the LA bomb plot. And then of course, 9/11 itself. A massive strategic victory for Al-Qaeda, in that it gave Americans a blank cheque to waste all their power through sheer stupidity.
And all of these plots were far harder than bribing a particular crewman on a cargo ship to open a particular container, input a code and push a button, watch a dozen drones zoom off and then dump the packing materials off board.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link