In the news today

Well honestly, living in neighbouring country to the Ukraine the atmosphere is jokingly tense - ppl keep joking about Russian intervention...

but deep down are scared that they(Russians) might get a bit too greedy and also intervene in here - especially with all the fishy stuff surrounding exploding tupolev(plane exploded mid-air, on the Russian soil - carrying the most important ppl in Poland), including awkward movements from one political party that gained the most from that(it seriously seemed like they were prepared for that for at least few months), and the Russia - who still hold the parts of the plane, after washing it, and leaving it in open to remove all evidence(no idea if it was done to humiliate us, or because they had to hide something).

whole revolt in Ukraine is weird tbh - situation was dire, but it is literally another minority of voters forcing their ideas on the rest. Situation escalated in a bit too convenient ways for some groups.

I'm a conservative and not Obama's biggest fan, but for entirely different reasons from Ryllharu. I think the President had to give a statement(s) considering the media attention directed towards him. As Animeniax said, he would be called weak with or without a response. At the same time, he probably has to be careful whenever addressing Russia's interventions because we've lost our moral high ground after having invaded Iraq (not saying the U.S. is as bad as Russia, but it certainly isn't a moral authority).

Ryllharu mentioned Russia cutting off energy exports to to the EU, but you have to remember that it's a two way street and would equally hurt Russia's economy. Perhaps the EU is in a bit more of a desperate situation trying to keep the Eurozone from collapsing, but half a trillion dollars in trade is no joke to Russia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ryllharu

It's funny how you just make assumptions of my political leanings...

Obama's a shitty president. It's not about liberal versus conservative. It's about credibility. He makes impassioned speeches...but does nothing, both foreign and domestic...

---

It's pretty easy to tell your political leanings after reading your posts for a few years now. While I regret pigeon-holing you as a right wing nut, Obama has been president most of the time I've known you or paid attention to your posts, so your criticisms of his administration are duly noted.

His critics love to slam Obama saying that he doesn't follow through with promises. They conveniently forget all the obstruction and bs that he has to go through to get the same things all the previous administrations got without the nonsense, like appointees and raising the debt ceiling, and a fiscal budget. So while his intent and message are clear, getting laws passed and a consensus for action have been almost impossible during his administration. It's pretty amazing what he has accomplished, considering "conservatives" have dogged his every step and worked to make his plan fail. Nevermind the mess he inherited to begin with...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carnage

I'm a conservative and not Obama's biggest fan, but for entirely different reasons from Ryllharu. I think the President had to give a statement(s) considering the media attention directed towards him. As Animeniax said, he would be called weak with or without a response. At the same time, he probably has to be careful whenever addressing Russia's interventions because we've lost our moral high ground after having invaded Iraq (not saying the U.S. is as bad as Russia, but it certainly isn't a moral authority).

Ryllharu mentioned Russia cutting off energy exports to to the EU, but you have to remember that it's a two way street and would equally hurt Russia's economy. Perhaps the EU is in a bit more of a desperate situation trying to keep the Eurozone from collapsing, but half a trillion dollars in trade is no joke to Russia.

---

I'm a fiscal conservative but I see bs for what it is. I don't agree with all of Obama's plans (higher minimum wage for one) but I also see what the political right has tried to do during his administration all while blaming him for the failures.

Economic sanctions are nothing to take lightly. As you said, it's a two way street, and in these global times it's more like a spaghetti highway. Beyond a lose-lose situation with a military response and a mild reprimand from the UN, economic sanctions are the best tool we have in this kind of situation.

It's one thing to cut off the gas flow to a country that can't pay its bills, like Ukraine, but totally another to countries from where money actually comes back. Russia has still failed to diversify its economy and thus oil and gas are pretty much where its sources of income lie. Of course they could still sell to Asia, for example, but especially with gas that would be too sudden considering it requires pipes.

I hope it won't come to that. While lessening the dependency on Russian energy would be jolly good indeed, doing it with sanctions would be troublesome. Because those go both ways as well. Russia imports tons of stuff due to lacking their own industry, and Finland is exporting quite a lot to Russia. That would stop if the EU erected economic sanctions as Russia would do the same.

While I don't approve foreign military interventions to democracies, it's still Ukraine's own fault as well for being so bloody weak and miserable. Economy is bad over here as it is, I don't want it to get even worse due to Ukraine's inability to look after their own shit.

If sanctions are placed, China will probably be the one to benefit by buying oil cheap from Russia and selling it at a marked up price to Europe. Transportation issues might be resolved if the oil doesn't have to be physically shipped from Russia to China.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carnage

If sanctions are placed, China will probably be the one to benefit by buying oil cheap from Russia and selling it at a marked up price to Europe. Transportation issues might be resolved if the oil doesn't have to be physically shipped from Russia to China.

---

China uses itself all the oil it can get. I don't think selling oil would be such a huge burden to Russia even if Europe wasn't buying for a while. Oil is used everywhere, after all, and its shipped everywhere the same way, unlike gas.

Terrible, terrible news today: Stephen Colbert will take over for David Letterman on the Tonight Show in 2015. No more Colbert Report, and he won't do the talk show in character either.

Huge ass accident outside my house... again, driver lost control, five people, car hit the wall dividing both sides of the tunnel entrance, driver died, 3 girls in critical condition, guy behind is relatively fine.

My camera doesn`t likes the light >.>

http://i62.tinypic.com/31644co.jpg

RIP H.R. Giger

Your weird art still freaks me out.

YouTube buying 'Twitch' for $1 Billion

I thought the IT bubble burst a long time ago. Some companies are so rich they can purposefully build another bubble. Jolly good for those who manage to cash it all in before that happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kraco

I thought the IT bubble burst a long time ago. Some companies are so rich they can purposefully build another bubble. Jolly good for those who manage to cash it all in before that happens.

---

Almost exactly what came to mind (shame I got to spread some rep). Not even a month ago I had a discussion about how IT companies are breaking records about purchases, adquisitions, capital increases and credits from banks. In my opinion (not expert one) this could be explained in two ways: Soaring inflation that makes value and price to detach or bubble.

Verizon and Vodafone comes to mind. If you take a look at the "price" they are paying for those adquisitions and the revenues, actually profits should be more appropriate, of the companies it would take like a century to get the investment return from those operations.

A man died from an apparent heart attack after a police officer applied a "chokehold" to subdue him during an arrest. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/19/ny...rest.html?_r=0

Per NY police dept policy, police rules forbid chokeholds and define them as including “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”

The problem is, a properly applied chokehold does not affect breathing, it prevents blood flow to the brain, depriving it of oxygen and causing loss of consciousness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Animeniax

Per NY police dept policy, police rules forbid chokeholds and define them as including “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”

The problem is, a properly applied chokehold does not affect breathing, it prevents blood flow to the brain, depriving it of oxygen and causing loss of consciousness.

---

Don't they forbid it because accidents can happen and the police generally don't need any publicity that promotes the police brutality image? The extreme example of this series is using a baton to hit somebody unconscious. Works every time in fiction, but in reality produces as many corpses as unconscious people.

The choke hold didn't kill him. Even if it was applied right it wouldn't have (and it may very well have because he was still speaking).

The 400+ pound mass of various belligerent cops dog piling him that caused a heart attack did.

Ever try dragging a stone across a field, or moving a woodstove? Kinda like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kraco

Don't they forbid it because accidents can happen and the police generally don't need any publicity that promotes the police brutality image? The extreme example of this series is using a baton to hit somebody unconscious. Works every time in fiction, but in reality produces as many corpses as unconscious people.

---

Probably so, though chokeholds may be safer on a person with health issues than getting tazed or pepper-sprayed.

Police officers are taught to mostly hit limbs with their batons, never the head. Of course, there are always those who don't follow policy in the heat of the moment or because they are aholes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ryllharu

The choke hold didn't kill him. Even if it was applied right it wouldn't have (and it may very well have because he was still speaking).

The 400+ pound mass of various belligerent cops dog piling him that caused a heart attack did.

Ever try dragging a stone across a field, or moving a woodstove? Kinda like that.

---

I agree, though I don't think the chokehold was properly applied because he could still talk. From the video, I think only one officer actually jumped on him (the guy applying the choke), though having several officers attack you probably wasn't good for his heart. Still, his history of health issues and 400lbs of bulk played the largest part. The public will still go after the police officer and dept.

Simpsons/Family Guy crossover episode in Sept!!!

http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/07/26/si...episode-video/

Robin Williams dead at 63


R.I.P

I didn't see that coming. He was a good man. Too bad.

Classic tormented comedian story, though I'm sure it had its unique twists. I remember back when he had his first major role as a villain, it was surprising at that point in his career yet he seemed oddly adept in the role.

My favorite quote from him (one of his roles): "I used to think that the worst thing in life was to end up all alone. It's not. The worst thing in life is ending up with people who make you feel all alone."