You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 09, 2016, 07:26:41 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: What's in the news?  (Read 175653 times)

AmberStarfire, Sara Nilsson and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Warlock

Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1050 on: May 21, 2015, 02:51:21 PM »
Israel implemented a Jim Crow-esque law that required that Palestinians take different busses from Jews. Only hours after it came into effect it was halted.

I personally wonder how it got of the brainstorming stage in the first place. Can't say I'm suprised that the Defense Minister belongs to the Likud party however.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/20/middleeast/israel-palestinian-bus-ban/

Offline elone

Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1051 on: May 21, 2015, 03:46:58 PM »
Nothing that the Netanyahu government does would surprise me. Separate roads, separate laws, etc. Apartheid at its worst.

Don't get me started.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1052 on: May 21, 2015, 07:13:37 PM »
ISIS may act like trolls and orcs, but there is method to their madness. They just took Ramadi in Iraq, a strategicly far more significant event, as far as I can tell, but Ramadi will always be just a dot on a map to people in the West. Palmyra, on the other hand, will remain in memory as "that place where ISIS destroyed countless ancient artifacts". Keeping your victories on everyone's mind is a powerful propaganda tool, and the more the media tells this story, the more it sends to potential jihadists the message that ISIS can do whatever it wants - and can do especially the things the West abhores. Again, a powerful propaganda message. Destroying all those ancient relics and ruins makes logical sense for ISIS; it doesn't take an orc or troll to see value in those actions.

It all goes down to M.O.N.E.Y.

The level an artifact site.. they just increased the value of the peices they put on the black market

Online Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1053 on: May 21, 2015, 09:38:34 PM »
I actually heard a discussion by a marine general of using "the powell doctrine" basicly tell our allies in the middle east we are ready to use force, and when (not if) they call for greater american support we move in with overwhelming military might, humiliate IS and prove their "all powerful rebuilt caliphate" idea the hollow idea it is, and just leave like we did against saddam in the first iraq war. Not sit on it, and try to occupy things, the US shows up, acts as requested by it's allies, and leaves.
In the end they are more like MS-13 or some other large gang than a nation, but there is a core of their forces formed from the former members of Saddam's republican guard.

what are your thoughts on this?


_____________________________________________________

on the ukranian topic. here's what I've been able to peice together.

The Russian Federation has been using what are traditionally called in Great Game terms, false flag forces. Born in Russia, speak Russian, trained by and enlisted in the Russian military, using hardware provided by Russian arms companies with weapons shipments disguised as foreign aid, and bare no insigna on their shoulder. They also intimidate or drive off any reporters or those with cell phone cameras who they catch observing them. They form the fighting heart of the rebels, and clam to be rebels.

Ukrane is allied with the US and EU and is reaping the military benefits of being aligned with great powers. The soldiers are Ukrainian military, born in Ukraine, and bare a Ukrainian flag on their uniforms. Their equipment is American and German provided, as is their training. Their military command also has access to american satellite coverage and can see all the action on the Russian/Ukrainian border the Russian Federation doesn't want them to see.


If previous battles are anything to look at The false flag troops form the veteran core of the rebel forces, and russia provides command and control.

Basicly "rebel" forces are reliant on deception and suprise blitz attacks while ukranian forces are reliant on detecting those attacks, then stopping and counterattacking. Both sides are trying to play the good guy, and after the massive fuckup of shooting down a civilian passenger plane the "rebel" forces are loosing that propaganda war. The constant struggle and the stubborn Ukrainian resistance and refusal to submit seems to be bleeding the russian federation. That said if pushed they have a lot of blood to spend.

Spending treasure however seems to be a much more troubling issue for Moscow, the western world has cut Russia off completely from their financial institutions and are squeezing them across the international markets. Leaving china as Russia's only foreign creditor willing to not squeeze. That said China, dispite Fox's opinion that they are best friends due to being "communists" (yeah fox is bullshit  ;D ) China is more pro-china than pro-russian or pro-asia, and that will cost them in the long term.

Oil is also a large problem, russia is too dependent on it's oil industry.

I may dislike putin but he's the oldest player in the great game, this is going to be a big test for him.

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1054 on: May 21, 2015, 09:52:34 PM »
Quote
I actually heard a discussion by a marine general of using "the powell doctrine" basicly tell our allies in the middle east we are ready to use force, and when (not if) they call for greater american support we move in with overwhelming military might, humiliate IS and prove their "all powerful rebuilt caliphate" idea the hollow idea it is, and just leave like we did against saddam in the first iraq war. Not sit on it, and try to occupy things, the US shows up, acts as requested by it's allies, and leaves.
In the end they are more like MS-13 or some other large gang than a nation, but there is a core of their forces formed from the former members of Saddam's republican guard.

what are your thoughts on this?

Makes a lot of sense to be honest, I just wsh I could make a pop culture reference but I cant.  :-\

Uhh.. if they are a gang then I guess its time to bring in The Law.  8-)


« Last Edit: May 21, 2015, 09:54:42 PM by Lustful Bride »

Online Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1055 on: May 21, 2015, 10:05:21 PM »
Makes a lot of sense to be honest, I just wsh I could make a pop culture reference but I cant.  :-\

Uhh.. if they are a gang then I guess its time to bring in The Law.  8-)




basically yeah the idea is to get premission and then go judge dredd on ISIS, it might not destroy them, but the purpose is to prove they are no better than the gang they are.

Also I wonder if some day the next president of Russia will visit Ukraine like the English royals are visiting Ireland. >->

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1056 on: May 22, 2015, 02:35:30 AM »
I actually heard a discussion by a marine general of using "the powell doctrine" basicly tell our allies in the middle east we are ready to use force, and when (not if) they call for greater american support we move in with overwhelming military might, humiliate IS and prove their "all powerful rebuilt caliphate" idea the hollow idea it is, and just leave like we did against saddam in the first iraq war. Not sit on it, and try to occupy things, the US shows up, acts as requested by it's allies, and leaves.
Quote from: Ironwolf85
basically yeah the idea is to get premission and then go judge dredd on ISIS, it might not destroy them, but the purpose is to prove they are no better than the gang they are.
I'd like to offer two thoughts on this:

One, it might not be as easy as you think. Humiliating them with overwhelming military force is a nice idea - in theory. But, for comparison, look at Israeli invasions of Gaza. A perfect example of military might employed against an irregular force that is mobile and can blend into the local population with relative ease. Hamas hasn't been humiliated or lost any support as a result of Israeli actions in Gaza. And with the "caliphate" you would be looking at the same scenario, only played out in a dozen cities and a territory the size of England. You'd be playing whack-a-mole for a while, have a big show of strength, and once the troops move out, ISIS will be back from hiding. To make a real difference you would need to do a lot more than push them out of some cities and strongholds. You'd need to pacify a notoriously unstable and volatile region and establish the rule of law there. Now if you think Americas "allies" will do that, once you bring your troops home I'd say you should think again, because their are too many conflicting interests at work in the region to establish a lasting peace like that.

Two, who will actually invite the Americans to act, in this scenario? Iraq? That would be fine until your troops reach the Syrian border, but then what? Do you send American troops into Syria? The chance that Assad will invite them in is slim at best, but more like nonexistent, but, like it or not, Assad is still head of the Syrian government. Without his consent any American boots on the ground in Syria will constitute an invasion. I don't think yet another American invasion in the middle east would be a terribly good idea, not to mention that it would be difficult to sell to the American taxpayer. So who will give you "permission" for this operation? The American "allies" in the middle east? I am not quite certain who that might be, but aside from Iraq and Syria no one has any legal standing to invite American troops into ISIS territory. But lets imagine for a moment that Saudi Arabia convinces the United States to send troops into Syria to fight ISIS. The US acting on behalf of Saudi Arabia would completely destroy whatever little standing the US might still have with half the players in the region, not to mention the small question of international law. In such a case the US troops would be acting very much like mercenaries for the Saudis, with the only difference from real mercanaries being that they wouldn't even be paid by the people on whose behalf they act.

Online Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1057 on: May 22, 2015, 07:59:00 AM »
I'd like to offer two thoughts on this:

One, it might not be as easy as you think. Humiliating them with overwhelming military force is a nice idea - in theory. But, for comparison, look at Israeli invasions of Gaza. A perfect example of military might employed against an irregular force that is mobile and can blend into the local population with relative ease. Hamas hasn't been humiliated or lost any support as a result of Israeli actions in Gaza. And with the "caliphate" you would be looking at the same scenario, only played out in a dozen cities and a territory the size of England. You'd be playing whack-a-mole for a while, have a big show of strength, and once the troops move out, ISIS will be back from hiding. To make a real difference you would need to do a lot more than push them out of some cities and strongholds. You'd need to pacify a notoriously unstable and volatile region and establish the rule of law there. Now if you think Americas "allies" will do that, once you bring your troops home I'd say you should think again, because their are too many conflicting interests at work in the region to establish a lasting peace like that.

Two, who will actually invite the Americans to act, in this scenario? Iraq? That would be fine until your troops reach the Syrian border, but then what? Do you send American troops into Syria? The chance that Assad will invite them in is slim at best, but more like nonexistent, but, like it or not, Assad is still head of the Syrian government. Without his consent any American boots on the ground in Syria will constitute an invasion. I don't think yet another American invasion in the middle east would be a terribly good idea, not to mention that it would be difficult to sell to the American taxpayer. So who will give you "permission" for this operation? The American "allies" in the middle east? I am not quite certain who that might be, but aside from Iraq and Syria no one has any legal standing to invite American troops into ISIS territory. But lets imagine for a moment that Saudi Arabia convinces the United States to send troops into Syria to fight ISIS. The US acting on behalf of Saudi Arabia would completely destroy whatever little standing the US might still have with half the players in the region, not to mention the small question of international law. In such a case the US troops would be acting very much like mercenaries for the Saudis, with the only difference from real mercanaries being that they wouldn't even be paid by the people on whose behalf they act.

good points, which is why it hasn't happened yet or anything like that.
 
But sometimes I feel like... like we put so much behind the local military forces and with the exception of the iran backed millitas they all seem to have spines made of jelly, and because of it people suffer and die to this gang-like medieval wanna-be state.  >,< It makes me wanna figure out how to DO SOMTHING.

Ideally I'd like the Iraqi army to grow a pair of balls and maybe forge a sort of national identity...
they don't seem to have one.
Loyalty to sect and tribe seem to trump loyalty to a country, and the result is a continuation of chaos and bloodshed.

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1058 on: May 22, 2015, 08:20:31 AM »
But sometimes I feel like... like we put so much behind the local military forces and with the exception of the iran backed millitas they all seem to have spines made of jelly, and because of it people suffer and die to this gang-like medieval wanna-be state.  >,< It makes me wanna figure out how to DO SOMTHING.

Ideally I'd like the Iraqi army to grow a pair of balls and maybe forge a sort of national identity...
they don't seem to have one.
Loyalty to sect and tribe seem to trump loyalty to a country, and the result is a continuation of chaos and bloodshed.
The problem with the Iraqi army is that half of it never existed. It's perhaps the biggest problem the failed "nation building" after the war created. Completely dissolving the old military structures that existed under Saddam opened the door wide to corruption on a grand scale. Commanders were appointed based on personal loyalty alone, to provide some people with cosy positions and a steady income, i.e. too much of the army leadership consisted of political appointees. When ISIS came those guys ran and you can't blame the soldiers for also running when their COs scadaddled. Many of those "commanders" (to use the term loosly) signed up "phantom soldiers" who never existed and pocketed the salary of those troops that only existed on paper. Other troops signed up to the army, but struck a deal with their COs that saw them never showing up for duty and instead going about another business while they split their official salary with their COs so they would turn a blind eye to the practice. A large portion of the so-called Iraqi Army is very much a paper tiger and you can't expect a paper tiger to grow some balls.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1059 on: May 22, 2015, 09:13:39 AM »
This should be blowing up on every American's tv screen/facebook.  http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/josh-duggar-accused-underage-sexual-abuse-report-article-1.2231301

Josh Duggar, from the 'infamous' 19 Kids and Counting show, has admitted to forcibly fondling 5 minors, one of which was 4 years old. Four of which were his own sisters.

For those that do not know this family... they are a deeply religious family who are homophobic/transphobic - going so far as to say that they are pedophiles wanting to molest your children. They give off a holier than thou vibe with their whole "sexual purity", no hand holding, side hugs only, no kissing, no dating (they do supervised courtship). They are also known for the fact that they are part of the "quiver full" belief - hence why Momma Duggar kept popping out kids till she miscarried her 20th.

The thing that makes me infuriated - beyond the fact that he molested people - is that his parents covered this up until the statute of limitations passed. They "sent him for counseling" with a family friend who had him help rebuild a house and prayed with him as "counseling". When the patriarch of the family finally did go to the police - he took his son to another family friend that was a state trooper.... who is now serving 56 years in prison for child pornography! And they, Josh included, dare to call this a "teenage mistake" and that it is all in the past because he apologized and was forgiven.

A mistake is something that happens once. It is not a mistake if you keep doing it. 

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1060 on: May 22, 2015, 09:29:53 AM »
I don't think Momma D has given up trying for more kids.  And yeah, it's all over the news feeds.  I came from a big family (5 kids), and I can't imagine that either of the parents actually see their kids as individuals.  One of these days, (if this doesn't do it), one of them is going to have a public meltdown and that'll be the end of it.

Offline Dice

  • Ooh, shiny.
  • Lord
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Location: Middle of nowhere, Australia
  • Gender: Male
  • Autocorrect will do its thing. Sorry about that.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1061 on: May 22, 2015, 09:37:00 AM »
Why is there a statute on an act that most children do not open up about until they are older?

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1062 on: May 22, 2015, 09:47:21 AM »
Why is there a statute on an act that most children do not open up about until they are older?
I would have to look it up to make certain, but I believe in Germany the statute of limitations on sexual offenses only starts to run on the victim's 18th birthday and I am pretty sure other countries have similar legislation.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1063 on: May 22, 2015, 09:48:30 AM »
Why is there a statute on an act that most children do not open up about until they are older?

Perhaps for (basically) the same reason that we don't allow legit child marriages?

Offline Dice

  • Ooh, shiny.
  • Lord
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Location: Middle of nowhere, Australia
  • Gender: Male
  • Autocorrect will do its thing. Sorry about that.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1064 on: May 22, 2015, 09:49:54 AM »
Perhaps for (basically) the same reason that we don't allow legit child marriages?
Sorry, I do not understand this post.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1065 on: May 22, 2015, 09:54:30 AM »
I thought you meant: why is there a statute outlawing something that most children would never want to engage in anyway, until they're around fifteen at least? Perhaps I'm missing something: were you saying that suspicions/charges of sex with kids should never be laid aside due to the time that has passed?

Offline Dice

  • Ooh, shiny.
  • Lord
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Location: Middle of nowhere, Australia
  • Gender: Male
  • Autocorrect will do its thing. Sorry about that.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1066 on: May 22, 2015, 09:56:10 AM »
I thought you meant: why is there a statute outlawing something that most children would never want to engage in anyway, until they're around fifteen at least? Perhaps I'm missing something: were you saying that suspicions/charges of sex with kids should never be laid aside due to the time that has passed?
No I mean why is there a statute of limitations on charging someone with child sex crimes?

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1067 on: May 22, 2015, 10:01:36 AM »
No I mean why is there a statute of limitations on charging someone with child sex crimes?

Okay, I guess I was misled by the word statute - read it as law, paragraphs, ban on something (and its being used in "statutory rape" to denote this kind of offence).

Offline Dice

  • Ooh, shiny.
  • Lord
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Location: Middle of nowhere, Australia
  • Gender: Male
  • Autocorrect will do its thing. Sorry about that.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1068 on: May 22, 2015, 10:09:55 AM »
If I came here and openly asked why I can't sexually assault children, I think you would be well within your right to ask the police to pay me a visit and the mods to ban me.

I find limits stupid for this. Most kids are unable to open up about these issues for years, sometimes decades and if you leave messing around with some girl that's not even a teen to a 3 year window for her to understand what happened and then open up about it I think your laws are fucked. I mean, right now in Australia we are having in depth looks into schools and church's from the 80 and before. Some people are being charged. How can there be a limit on this? I don't understand.

Online Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1069 on: May 22, 2015, 11:15:01 AM »
The problem with the Iraqi army is that half of it never existed. It's perhaps the biggest problem the failed "nation building" after the war created. Completely dissolving the old military structures that existed under Saddam opened the door wide to corruption on a grand scale. Commanders were appointed based on personal loyalty alone, to provide some people with cosy positions and a steady income, i.e. too much of the army leadership consisted of political appointees. When ISIS came those guys ran and you can't blame the soldiers for also running when their COs scadaddled. Many of those "commanders" (to use the term loosly) signed up "phantom soldiers" who never existed and pocketed the salary of those troops that only existed on paper. Other troops signed up to the army, but struck a deal with their COs that saw them never showing up for duty and instead going about another business while they split their official salary with their COs so they would turn a blind eye to the practice. A large portion of the so-called Iraqi Army is very much a paper tiger and you can't expect a paper tiger to grow some balls.

I'm sure Malaki was more than willing to stack the deck with cronies who know nothing about military operations, and are loyal to their wallets above their country. >-> it's funny, the bush administration let that shit happen in Afghanistan too.
Nothing but little tin soldiers all lined up in pretty rows for the cameras, nothing but tin...

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1070 on: May 22, 2015, 11:19:03 AM »
The primary reason for statutes of limitations in general is the reliability of evidence and the possible inability for witnesses (both prosecution and defense) to be found and/or cross-examined.  Witnesses age and may even die before the crime is brought to light.  The accuracy of memory may come into question.  Physical evidence may degrade or be completely destroyed.  This is what makes cold cases (usually involving murder, as there is no statute of limitations on murder) so hard to try - again, both for prosecution and for defense.

Offline BeorningTopic starter

Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1071 on: May 22, 2015, 04:47:32 PM »
In other news... a halo was visible in Mexico:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/22/halo-sun-mexico-city_n_7420770.html

Centuries ago, this kind of thing was considered a miracle or an omen...

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1072 on: May 22, 2015, 05:10:51 PM »
In other news... a halo was visible in Mexico:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/22/halo-sun-mexico-city_n_7420770.html

Centuries ago, this kind of thing was considered a miracle or an omen...

Weird, alittle while ago one of these appeared over Puerto Rico. 0_o

Online HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: What's in the news?
« Reply #1073 on: May 23, 2015, 05:50:20 AM »
So, with the counting still going, it's looking like Ireland is currently voting about 3:1 in favour of gay marriage. Full results won't be in til probably later this evening, but right now it seems very much decided.

Offline Dice

  • Ooh, shiny.
  • Lord
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Location: Middle of nowhere, Australia
  • Gender: Male
  • Autocorrect will do its thing. Sorry about that.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2