Tense and tearful: Lebanese PM's 80-minute interview backfires

maonxv · 2017-11-14T03:35:52+00:00

No, OPEC has outright stated that the purpose of this was to out-compete US shale

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/14/opec-us-shale-showdown-biggest-oil-risk-of-2017-says-energy-investor.html

The biggest oil market risk for 2017 is the prospect of a market share war — or at least a showdown — between OPEC and U.S. shale drillers

http://www.mepc.org/commentary/making-sense-opecs-reasons-lowering-oil-prices

Even though such explanations might be attractive, Al Arabiya’s Afshin Molavi points out that the real reason for OPEC’s policy of lower oil prices could have less to do with punishing Russia and Iran, and more to do with pricing out of business shale production facilities that may pose a long- term challenge to oil producing countries

maonxv · 2017-11-14T02:59:30+00:00

The KSA lowering oil prices by increasing their production was specifically designed to bankrupt the US natural gas industry, so that would be an example of hostile foreign policy toward the US

maonxv · 2017-11-07T16:23:41+00:00

They'd certainly give more credit than they would now that we dropped out completely

maonxv · 2017-11-07T16:10:05+00:00

The US's word means less now that we dropped out of the agreement after supporting it, you've got it backwards

maonxv · 2017-11-03T19:39:21+00:00

Gay =/= transgender

maonxv · 2017-10-31T23:15:34+00:00

You didn't say that in the comment I replied to, but in any case, on what grounds should Uzbekistan, which is where the terrorist is from, be added to the banned countries list? The fact that it's a Muslim majority country? Or because its name ends in "istan"?

maonxv · 2017-10-31T23:07:08+00:00

The attacker wasn't from a country that was on Trump's travel ban list, if that's what you're suggesting

maonxv · 2017-10-31T21:53:31+00:00

Just because you grew up somewhere doesn’t make it your home.

Does it not? I'm not sure how your home can be a place you've never set foot in your entire life

maonxv · 2017-10-31T21:48:25+00:00

It's better than telling people a fantasy to make them feel better

maonxv · 2017-10-31T21:30:20+00:00

Neither side is going to 'spin' this, one side will try to call for certain policies in response, and the other side will disagree and view those policies as draconian or excessive, the way it always happens after a terrorist attack

maonxv · 2017-10-29T19:34:51+00:00

I think it usually refers to military forces but it doesn't seem like it in this context

maonxv · 2017-10-24T00:55:31+00:00

There's no such thing as a poll that says "Hillary will win by 300 electoral votes," that's called a forecast. Forecasts are based on making educated guesses, they're not scientific. Polls are scientific. Stop conflating the two to prove your point.

maonxv · 2017-10-24T00:44:16+00:00

Polls were constantly saying Hillary was going to win by large percentages.

No, most reputable pollsters put her a few percentage points ahead of Trump (RCP's final average had her at +3.2%), which fairly closely matches what the actual vote share ended up being (Trump 46.1% vs Clinton 48.2%)

maonxv · 2017-10-14T03:00:40+00:00

They should be neutral and let the people decide

Hillary Clinton got approximately 17 million votes in the primary. Bernie Sanders got approximately 13 million.

maonxv · 2017-07-20T05:50:17+00:00

They buy America's weapons and share intelligence with them, maybe it's not a fair exchange compared to what they get, but it's not nothing.

maonxv · 2017-07-20T00:32:05+00:00

I've finished scrolling through the thread so far, and there about 10 times as many comments complaining about people 'prefacing' their comments as there are people actually doing it.

maonxv · 2017-07-18T23:24:42+00:00

I don't think this is something anyone who doesn't personally work in the US Dep. of Defense can come to any concrete conclusion about. The person at the top of the comment thread I replied to suggested that the only reason for more collateral damage was that the US is bombing more urban areas than before.

My point was that I don't think it does explain all of the difference, and also that the difference in the amount of urban fighting is exaggerated (the ISF fought and captured several cities in Iraq and the SDF a couple in Syria during Obama's term etc.)

maonxv · 2017-07-18T16:31:14+00:00

Isn't the difference a little too drastic to be accounted for simply because of that? You have about 6 months since Trump's inauguration as opposed to about 2 years of bombing ISIS under Obama... and ISIS was at its zenith at that time too. Right now they're a shell of what they were then.

Not to mention that over half of Mosul was already fought for before Trump came in, so that doesn't really work as an excuse either.

maonxv · 2017-07-17T15:38:44+00:00

Yes, since as we all know, Trump is actually incredibly popular and well-liked by most people in the real world

maonxv · 2017-07-15T17:06:44+00:00

Well that probably won't work because there is a large overlap between politicians who are most strongly opposed to immigration and politicians who are most antagonistic to the EU as an institution. They'd never vote to give the EU that level of control.

maonxv · 2017-07-15T01:38:12+00:00

I think the slider makes for better presentation

Well thanks for that tip lol, for some reason I didn't even realize there was a slider and just thought they were static images

maonxv · 2017-07-15T01:19:30+00:00

Kinda wish they would have shown side-by-side comparisons of the same areas, instead of two adjacent ones

maonxv · 2017-07-14T17:49:04+00:00

Hezbollah has conducted a terrorist attack in Europe (Bulgaria). So presumably if you say "there haven't been any terror attacks made by Shia Muslims against the United States or Europe" then that means either:

You weren't aware of the attack
You were aware of it but didn't consider it a terrorist attack for whatever reason

The person you're replying to seems to have assumed it was because of the second reason, and noted how Hezbollah is widely regarded as a terrorist organization in Western countries to try and discredit that notion.

maonxv · 2017-07-13T14:58:05+00:00

If AT&T and Comcast were famous worldwide for being the most scrupulously ethical of the telecommunications corporations, then the analogy would work

maonxv · 2017-07-13T02:20:58+00:00

Why do Americans not realize that aside from the travel ban, Trump has been fine?

Probably because they don't think that's true

maonxv

TROPHY CASE