All purpose news and politics thread part VII: News & Politics Total Landscaping

[Kirby101]

Isn't that Ukraine bill also tied up with the whole Tik Tok ban thing and a bunch of other nonsense that helped delay it?

Mainly it was those Republicans in thrall to Putin who tried to stop it.

[ed2962]

I think that some of the reluctance is that there's seemingly no end in sight to the conflict and some don't want to basically give Ukraine a blank check and then how we're supposed to pay for all of this aid to them. And we haven't even talked about how to pay to rebuild Ukraine after this is all over. Not saying that we shouldn't help Ukraine but...

We're concurrently giving a blank check to Israel ( and have been for years ). When we really want to, we seem to be able to find money for war.

[Catlady in training]

I think that some of the reluctance is that there's seemingly no end in sight to the conflict and some don't want to basically give Ukraine a blank check and then how we're supposed to pay for all of this aid to them. And we haven't even talked about how to pay to rebuild Ukraine after this is all over. Not saying that we shouldn't help Ukraine but...

I'm gonna quote myself for this one:

I would like to remind everyone that US is not supposed to help Ukraine out of some goodwill or a feeling of charity. US and UK gave Ukraine security assurances when they gave up their nuclear weapons.
I would of course argue that the rest of us, especially European countries, have a moral obligation to help as much as we can and that helping them is in our own best interests, but for US and UK, there is also that legal obligation. Unless, of course, we accept that international agreements have no value, no matter who signs them. (We already know they have no value for Terrorist russia.)

All this does in the long term is ensure that countries will be more interested in procuring nuclear weapons, as they seem to be the only guarantee of security for their citizens.

One of the reasons there is "no end in sight" is that Ukraine didn't receive all of the aid they could have in 2022 and 2023. Perhaps if they had, it could have been over by now and Putler would be pondering which of his advisers who told him it was a good idea is to blame. It's one of those "we will never know" scenarios.

[Catlady in training]

Why is US threatening to ban TikTok and will other countries follow suit?

Why is the US threatening to ban TikTok?

US lawmakers and authorities are concerned that data from TikTok’s 170 million US users could be accessed by the Chinese state under national security laws. Christopher Wray, the director of the FBI, the US domestic intelligence and security agency, has said that ByteDance is “controlled by the Chinese government” and has warned that Beijing authorities can influence people by manipulating the algorithm that curates what people view on TikTok, as well as allowing the government to collect user data for “traditional espionage operations”.

TikTok denies that the Chinese government has attempted to access US user data and says it would reject any such request. In an appearance before Congress last year, TikTok’s chief executive, Shou Zi Chew, said: “Let me state this unequivocally: ByteDance is not an agent of China or any other country.”

If the Chinese government is too pissed over this, they might ban Facebook in China in retaliation. Oh, wait.

[Catlady in training]

West must boost defence as era of peace in Europe is over, says Ukrainian foreign minister

Ukraine’s foreign minister has enthusiastically praised US politicians for approving a long-delayed $61bn military aid package for Ukraine, but cautioned that fresh supplies would not immediately turn the tide on the battlefield.

“Hallelujah,” Dmytro Kuleba said when asked for his reaction to Tuesday’s final vote by the US Senate. He said it had been “my belief that we would have a positive outcome”, based in part on the cultivation of religious conservatives, but the west had to “realise the era of peace in Europe is over” and build its defence industry.

Kuleba said Ukraine’s allies should switch from “expressing condolences and sympathy to Ukrainians and promising to help with recovery, to preventing loss of life and destruction of the country”.

He said the restoration of US military aid, held up for months by Donald Trump-aligned Republicans, would not be sufficient to defeat Russia. “No single package can stop the Russians. What will stop the Russians is a united front of all of Ukraine and all of its partners.”

Kuleba said the west needed to increase arms production, as Ukraine had, because it had been outpaced by Russia. Russia is out-shelling Ukraine by a ratio of about 10 to one, while Ukraine is running short of air defences.

“When I see what Russia achieved in building up is defence industrial base in two years of the war and what the west has achieved, I think something is wrong on the part of the west,” Kuleba said. “The west has to realise the era of peace in Europe is over.”

Peak military industrial production on the part of Ukraine’s allies is not expected until late 2024, the foreign minister said, indicating that Kyiv is anticipating the war lasting into next year. Russia is expected to mount a summer offensive and is thought to be in the process of mobilising an extra 100,000 to fight.

He was dismissive of those who argued that after more than two years of full-scale war it was time for Ukraine to negotiate. He said there were “200 rounds of discussions” with the Kremlin between 2014 and the 2022 invasion.

Some observers supported peace out of naivety, he believed. Others were “playing for Putin”. A third category “did not understand Russia” or its president. They were wrongly convinced it was necessary to negotiate with the devil, he said.

The minister said Putin would only engage in meaningful talks when his military position was “close to collapse”. To get to this point, Ukraine had to pursue a twofold strategy: “success on the battlefield” and a coalition of countries to back Zelenskiy’s peace formula of a Russian withdrawal, reparations and a war crimes tribunal.

As a side note, I can't believe that Mike Johnson comes out of this as some sort of hero.

“I think Mike Johnson did a good thing for America and for the world,” he said. Asked why he thought Johnson had changed his mind after opposing aid for six months, Kuleba suggested religion may have played a role.

The first indication that Johnson could be willing to back the package came in December, Kuleba said. An evangelical Christian, Johnson sent a video message of support to a prayer breakfast in Kyiv convened by Ruslan Stefanchuk, the chair of Ukraine’s parliament.

Johnson ultimately acted out of conviction, Kuleba said. “It came from his deep beliefs and not from political expediency.”

[Mister Mets]

The News should be telling people what they need to know, not what they want to hear. One is journalism, one is infotainment.

Sure, but even in that context there's significant editorial discretion. There's also the question of what the non-partisan news ( to distinguish the evening news from Fox News or Daily Kos) should do differently and whether it'll reach the swing voters who don't follow the news that carefully. I suppose there's the argument that if the mainstream media did their job better they would have more of an audience since people want to be informed which has personal and professional benefits.

[CaptainEurope]

One of the most influential fake news factories, Gateway Pundit, had to file for bankruptcy after being sued by election workers they had slandered.

[Dalak]

One of the most influential fake news factories, Gateway Pundit, had to file for bankruptcy after being sued by election workers they had slandered.

While I know that there are those who would abuse it, I wish there was more to do about misinformation than just call it out or sue them after the fact considering how many people won't see and/or believe any corrections and have been trained to disbelieve facts that don't suit their narrative.

[Jack Dracula]

While I know that there are those who would abuse it, I wish there was more to do about misinformation than just call it out or sue them after the fact considering how many people won't see and/or believe any corrections and have been trained to disbelieve facts that don't suit their narrative.

Well, we have an Environmental Protection Agency to prevent bad actors from polluting the physical environment maybe we need a similar agency to prevent pollution of our online environment.

[Dalak]

Well, we have an Environmental Protection Agency to prevent bad actors from polluting the physical environment maybe we need a similar agency to prevent pollution of our online environment.

They want to protect TikTok users from China, why not protect all online users from deliberate misinformation? The obvious reason: because 1 of the 2 parties in our 2 party system thrives on it in order to keep any sort of voter base. Then there's the legality of punishing foreign sources, accusations of bias, the aforementioned abusers, etc. I know it's a hassle to plan let alone ensure enforcement.

[Jack Dracula]

They want to protect TikTok users from China, why not protect all online users from deliberate misinformation? The obvious reason: because 1 of the 2 parties in our 2 party system thrives on it in order to keep any sort of voter base. Then there's the legality of punishing foreign sources, accusations of bias, the aforementioned abusers, etc. I know it's a hassle to plan let alone ensure enforcement.

Problematic but not impossible. I think most of the arguments would be whether malicious intent is covered by the First Amendment.
How bad does it have to become before national security takes precedent over freedom of speech?

[Tuck]

Problematic but not impossible. I think most of the arguments would be whether malicious intent is covered by the First Amendment.
How bad does it have to become before national security takes precedent over freedom of speech?

Apparently, all it takes is merely encouraging draftees to refuse to be drafted into a war a wealthy newspaper owner sold to America on shaky grounds.

[shooshoomanjoe]

Well put.
But also: turnout, turnout, turnout. Who is more likely to "sit this one out" among people who don't vote in every election?

That's on dem leadership for pushing an unpopular president to run again. They're lucky Biden's opponent is more unpopular than him

[Mister Mets]

Apparently, all it takes is merely encouraging draftees to refuse to be drafted into a war a wealthy newspaper owner sold to America on shaky grounds.

The legal issue with Tiktok is not about misinformation, but about the way the Chinese government could make Bytedance hand over the data of American citizens.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tiktok-...s-reasons-why/

Congress has officially called for Tiktok to be sold, and has given the company a year to do so.

Well, we have an Environmental Protection Agency to prevent bad actors from polluting the physical environment maybe we need a similar agency to prevent pollution of our online environment.

There are a few major differences.

We have a first amendment protecting freedom of speech. There is no equivalent amendment protecting the freedom to make money with minimal regulations.

As a result, there's a legal framework in environmental law that often includes a need to get approval before undergoing a new project. We don't have anything like that with the media, because that would clash with the freedom of the press.

Modern media is fast and regulations can be slow. It takes a lot more time to build a factory that pollutes the environment than it would to make a website based on ridiculous and harmful claims (IE- Every member of Congress knows that Pizzagate is real and that Donald Trump is a threat to the pedophile conspiracy.)

It's probably a good thing that the first amendment stands in the way of an EPA against bad media. These regulations could easily be abused. Just imagine a second Trump administration taking advantage of these laws. They could go after anyone on the left who is hyperbolic or says something debunked (that Michael Brown had his hands up when he was shot, or that Matthew Shepard was targeted because of his sexuality.) They could also use it to slow down their critics, slow-walking approval of a new MSNBC show or something.

[/b]

That's on dem leadership for pushing an unpopular president to run again. They're lucky Biden's opponent is more unpopular than him

The initial problem was the selection of Kamala Harris as Vice-President. Realistically, it's either her or Biden.

[Tuck]

The legal issue with Tiktok is not about misinformation, but about the way the Chinese government could make Bytedance hand over the data of American citizens.

I'm aware. And foreign parties don't enjoy the same level of speech protection. But the post I responded to at least implied malicious intent should be grounds for limiting speech.

It's probably a good thing that the first amendment stands in the way of an EPA against bad media. These regulations could easily be abused. Just imagine a second Trump administration taking advantage of these laws. They could go after anyone on the left who is hyperbolic or says something debunked (that Michael Brown had his hands up when he was shot, or that Matthew Shepard was targeted because of his sexuality.) They could also use it to slow down their critics, slow-walking approval of a new MSNBC show or something.

Trump had Princeton University investigated for discrimination after the President (or someone in administration) made a statement about the University still being racist under a systemic lens.