War

BudmanTX

BudmanTX

Well-Known Member
OldMedUser said:
Was that a cluster bomb? Some nasty shit I'm glad I managed to avoid.

:peace:
Click to expand...
I was going with mine clearing, honestly, cause I really can't see a vehicle or anything prior to the blast...I could be wrong, Russia has been known to pack vehicle with large amounts of explosives and setting them off.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Sativied said:
Putin's just being Putin. There will always be Putins and they'll always be the product of the same humanity that doesn't support Ukraine enough to end this.
Click to expand...
The situation is seriously complicated by the threat of nuclear escalation. It’s the same fear that led to US half-heartedly prosecuting the war in Vietnam.

Granted, the politics on the ground in Vietnam don’t compare to the current situation. However, perhaps in an instance of convergent evolution, the results are pretty similar. Enough aid to keep the patient alive, but not the decisive effort that could have led to Ukraine entering winter in better shape.

Sending more aid has become a policy to which our narrow Republican majority is loudly opposed, for the usual reason: not that it’s a bad thing, but that it’s embraced by the Democrats, and they are to be opposed regardless of whether or not that opposition is in the interests of the nation, the alliance or our notional allies in Ukraine.

The other Nato countries are also inconsistent or hesitant to commit serious ordnance. It’s being treated like the “phony war” of ‘39-‘40 even though it is plainly a full hot shooting war.

This is becoming a war of attrition in more ways than one. The interest of the West, with its messy politics, is suffering attrition. I can conceive of this war ending badly for Ukraine because the West would sink almost enough resources into that nation, then stop when the domestic politics of sending aid become exhausted and paralyzed. It’s the sunk cost fallacy turned on its head, with almost enough aid as ineffective as none. It would be tragic if Ukraine loses or is saddled with a frozen conflict because Nato, and especially its largest member, failed to commit.

But there is only so much the White House can do by executive orders. The strange and unholy shadow alliance between Republicans and Putin’s Russia is obstructing a proper response by US, and with their pet news channels, they are poisoning public opinion against a war whose moral
dimension is as simple and obvious as not abandoning Britain eighty years ago. Republicans were different creatures back then, and Biden is being denied the power to really do things that Roosevelt had available.

It’s screwed in several dimensions.
 
printer

printer

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
The situation is seriously complicated by the threat of nuclear escalation. It’s the same fear that led to US half-heartedly prosecuting the war in Vietnam.

Granted, the politics on the ground in Vietnam don’t compare to the current situation. However, perhaps in an instance of convergent evolution, the results are pretty similar. Enough aid to keep the patient alive, but not the decisive effort that could have led to Ukraine entering winter in better shape.

Sending more aid has become a policy to which our narrow Republican majority is loudly opposed, for the usual reason: not that it’s a bad thing, but that it’s embraced by the Democrats, and they are to be opposed regardless of whether or not that opposition is in the interests of the nation, the alliance or our notional allies in Ukraine.

The other Nato countries are also inconsistent or hesitant to commit serious ordnance. It’s being treated like the “phony war” of ‘39-‘40 even though it is plainly a full hot shooting war.

This is becoming a war of attrition in more ways than one. The interest of the West, with its messy politics, is suffering attrition. I can conceive of this war ending badly for Ukraine because the West would sink almost enough resources into that nation, then stop when the domestic politics of sending aid become exhausted and paralyzed. It’s the sunk cost fallacy turned on its head, with almost enough aid as ineffective as none. It would be tragic if Ukraine loses or is saddled with a frozen conflict because Nato, and especially its largest member, failed to commit.

But there is only so much the White House can do by executive orders. The strange and unholy shadow alliance between Republicans and Putin’s Russia is obstructing a proper response by US, and with their pet news channels, they are poisoning public opinion against a war whose moral
dimension is as simple and obvious as not abandoning Britain eighty years ago. Republicans were different creatures back then, and Biden is being denied the power to really do things that Roosevelt had available.

It’s screwed in several dimensions.
Click to expand...
But Putin has been saying things that are music to Maga ears. Outlaw gay's? Been there, done that. Reaffirm the man being king of the castile and a woman can only complain when she is in the hospital? Check. Burn baby burn, "We don't need no stinkin' carbon tax.". Trump first day, "Drill, drill, drill."
 
printer

printer

Well-Known Member
Nearly half in new survey say US spending too much on Ukraine aid
Nearly half of voters in a new survey said the United States is spending too much on aid for Ukraine, which comes just ahead of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Washington.

The Financial Times-Michigan Ross poll found that 48 percent of voters said the U.S. was spending “too much” on sending financial and military aid to Ukraine. Twenty-seven percent said the U.S. was spending the right amount, and 11 percent said the U.S. was not spending enough.

Republicans were more likely to say the U.S. is spending too much, with 65 percent saying so. About half of independent voters and 32 percent of Democrats said the U.S. was spending too much.
The poll also surveyed respondents on whether the U.S. was spending the right amount on aid to Israel in its war against the militant group Hamas, which launched a deadly surprise attack on Israel in early October. It found that 40 percent believed the U.S. was spending too much on sending aid to Israel, and 30 percent said the funding levels were the right amount.
Lawmakers are divided on approving an aid package that includes funding for Ukraine and Israel. The GOP-led House passed an Israel-only aid package last month — but Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) declined to bring it to the floor.

Senate Republicans then blocked a measure to provide aid to Ukraine and Israel last week, saying they were unsatisfied with the border security provisions laid out in the bill. The $111 billion emergency supplemental package requested by President Biden also included aid for the Indo-Pacific region and funding for humanitarian aid in Gaza.

The White House announced Sunday that Biden invited Zelensky for a meeting in Washington to “underscore the United States’ unshakeable commitment to supporting the people of Ukraine as they defend themselves against Russia’s brutal invasion.” Zelensky is also slated to meet with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), as many members of the House GOP have voiced their opposition to Ukraine funding.

The Biden administration warned earlier this month that the U.S. will run out of money for Ukraine amid its war with Russia without congressional action on the matter.
thehill.com

Nearly half in new survey say US spending too much on Ukraine aid

Nearly half of voters in a new survey said the United States is spending too much on aid for Ukraine, which comes just ahead of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Washington. The Fin…
thehill.com thehill.com

Most in new poll support Israel’s military action against Hamas
Most Americans in a new poll said they support Israel’s military response to Hamas in the two months since the militant group launched a deadly attack on Israel.
The Wall Street Journal poll found that 55 percent of respondents said they believe Israel is taking the necessary action to defend itself and prevent Hamas from launching another attack. Twenty-five percent said that Israel’s actions are disproportionate and are going too far, while 20 percent said they did not know.

The survey also found Americans were more likely to sympathize with the Israeli people over the war, which broke out after Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel on Oct. 7 that left more than 1,200 people dead.
Forty-two percent of respondents said they sympathize more strongly or somewhat more strongly with the Israeli people instead of the Palestinians. Just 12 percent said they sympathized more with the Palestinians, while 33 percent said they sympathized with both sides equally.
The Journal noted political party affiliation was an indicator of whether someone was more likely to sympathize with the Israelis or Palestinians. Nearly 25 percent of Democrats said they sympathized with the Palestinians more, for example, while about 17 percent said the Israeli people.

More than two-thirds of Republicans in the new survey said they sided with the Israeli people more, with just 2 percent saying they sympathized with the Palestinian people more. Seventeen percent of Republicans said they sympathized with both sides equally.
This poll comes as Israeli forces have pushed into southern Gaza, where many residents had fled to escape shelling.
Many international organizations, humanitarian groups and policymakers have warned the situation in Gaza, as a result of Israeli attacks, has become dire. The Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry said more than 17,000 Palestinians, including thousands of women and children, have been killed in the fighting so far.

When asked in the new poll about whether the amount of U.S. aid to Israel was the right amount, 22 percent of respondents said the U.S. was doing too much, 25 percent said it was doing too little and 37 percent said it was the right amount.
Additionally, 30 percent said the U.S. is giving the Palestinian people enough aid. Another 26 percent said the U.S. was giving too little and 21 percent said it was too much.
The poll was conducted among 1,500 registered voters from Nov. 29 to Dec. 4 and has a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points.
thehill.com

Most in new poll support Israel’s military action against Hamas

Most Americans in a new poll said they support Israel’s military response to Hamas in the two months since the militant group launched a deadly attack on Israel. The Wall Street Journal poll found …
thehill.com thehill.com
 
Bagginski

Bagginski

Well-Known Member
printer said:
Nearly half in new survey say US spending too much on Ukraine aid
Nearly half of voters in a new survey said the United States is spending too much on aid for Ukraine, which comes just ahead of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Washington.

The Financial Times-Michigan Ross poll found that 48 percent of voters said the U.S. was spending “too much” on sending financial and military aid to Ukraine. Twenty-seven percent said the U.S. was spending the right amount, and 11 percent said the U.S. was not spending enough.

Republicans were more likely to say the U.S. is spending too much, with 65 percent saying so. About half of independent voters and 32 percent of Democrats said the U.S. was spending too much.
The poll also surveyed respondents on whether the U.S. was spending the right amount on aid to Israel in its war against the militant group Hamas, which launched a deadly surprise attack on Israel in early October. It found that 40 percent believed the U.S. was spending too much on sending aid to Israel, and 30 percent said the funding levels were the right amount.
Lawmakers are divided on approving an aid package that includes funding for Ukraine and Israel. The GOP-led House passed an Israel-only aid package last month — but Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) declined to bring it to the floor.

Senate Republicans then blocked a measure to provide aid to Ukraine and Israel last week, saying they were unsatisfied with the border security provisions laid out in the bill. The $111 billion emergency supplemental package requested by President Biden also included aid for the Indo-Pacific region and funding for humanitarian aid in Gaza.

The White House announced Sunday that Biden invited Zelensky for a meeting in Washington to “underscore the United States’ unshakeable commitment to supporting the people of Ukraine as they defend themselves against Russia’s brutal invasion.” Zelensky is also slated to meet with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), as many members of the House GOP have voiced their opposition to Ukraine funding.

The Biden administration warned earlier this month that the U.S. will run out of money for Ukraine amid its war with Russia without congressional action on the matter.
thehill.com

Nearly half in new survey say US spending too much on Ukraine aid

Nearly half of voters in a new survey said the United States is spending too much on aid for Ukraine, which comes just ahead of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Washington. The Fin…
thehill.com thehill.com

Most in new poll support Israel’s military action against Hamas
Most Americans in a new poll said they support Israel’s military response to Hamas in the two months since the militant group launched a deadly attack on Israel.
The Wall Street Journal poll found that 55 percent of respondents said they believe Israel is taking the necessary action to defend itself and prevent Hamas from launching another attack. Twenty-five percent said that Israel’s actions are disproportionate and are going too far, while 20 percent said they did not know.

The survey also found Americans were more likely to sympathize with the Israeli people over the war, which broke out after Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel on Oct. 7 that left more than 1,200 people dead.
Forty-two percent of respondents said they sympathize more strongly or somewhat more strongly with the Israeli people instead of the Palestinians. Just 12 percent said they sympathized more with the Palestinians, while 33 percent said they sympathized with both sides equally.
The Journal noted political party affiliation was an indicator of whether someone was more likely to sympathize with the Israelis or Palestinians. Nearly 25 percent of Democrats said they sympathized with the Palestinians more, for example, while about 17 percent said the Israeli people.

More than two-thirds of Republicans in the new survey said they sided with the Israeli people more, with just 2 percent saying they sympathized with the Palestinian people more. Seventeen percent of Republicans said they sympathized with both sides equally.
This poll comes as Israeli forces have pushed into southern Gaza, where many residents had fled to escape shelling.
Many international organizations, humanitarian groups and policymakers have warned the situation in Gaza, as a result of Israeli attacks, has become dire. The Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry said more than 17,000 Palestinians, including thousands of women and children, have been killed in the fighting so far.

When asked in the new poll about whether the amount of U.S. aid to Israel was the right amount, 22 percent of respondents said the U.S. was doing too much, 25 percent said it was doing too little and 37 percent said it was the right amount.
Additionally, 30 percent said the U.S. is giving the Palestinian people enough aid. Another 26 percent said the U.S. was giving too little and 21 percent said it was too much.
The poll was conducted among 1,500 registered voters from Nov. 29 to Dec. 4 and has a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points.
thehill.com

Most in new poll support Israel’s military action against Hamas

Most Americans in a new poll said they support Israel’s military response to Hamas in the two months since the militant group launched a deadly attack on Israel. The Wall Street Journal poll found …
thehill.com thehill.com
Click to expand...
Another example of polling distortions introduced by habit & method.

one of the most UNexamined sources of distortion is telephone culture.

we have two distinct such: cell culture & wire culture
Wire culture uses POTS (plain old telephone service) which is wired into the structure of home and office. The people who still maintain POTS lines have a culture of ANSWERING THE PHONE. EVERY time & quickly, if possible. As a result, they answer the phone prepared to interact & respond. They tend to be on average older, more rural, & more politically “conservative”. When engaged by pollsters, they generally attempt to co-operate, which makes them comparatively susceptible to pollsters’ carefully constructed questions. This makes it easy for a hired pollster to accumulate the numbers they want to deliver

Cell culture OTOH treats their phones entirely differently: as likely to ignore or block a caller as to answer (or more so), unique approaches to staying in touch, and no real sense of obligation to answer a call. They are far more disruptive to normal response accumulation, engaging with the pollsters in a challenging / questioning manner. This makes it easy for pollsters to eliminate them from the results.

in the poll in current question, the polling universe was 1200+; we don’t know if this is the number of contacts attempted, or of the accepted responses . This would inevitably involve a split between cell numbers & POTS numbers, and almost certainly result in more accepted conservative responses than theoretically ‘librul’ responses, due entirely to the phone culture involved.

To overcome this would require a structure intended to overcome it, such as making sure cell & POTS responses were *numerically* equivalent. Polling is very similar to telemarketing & direct mail marketing, in that there are lists: specifically, golden lists of numbers/respondents who consistently provide consistent responses (taking polls, GOP/Dem-friendly or hostile, falls for every sales pitch, buys every X, etc). Telemarketers for example LOVE lists of people who predictably spend money on telemarketed stuff - and they PAY TO HAVE THEM.

As I’ve said before, not all polling is even legit: a great deal of political polls are worked up by partisan pollsters-for-hire, seeking to provide their customers with numbers that support the contracted issues/positions. Such pollsters can easily obtain lists by region, by zip code, by state of those who will give the responses the customer wants, and those pollsters make bank

This is the reason some pollsters go out of their way to get a real cross-section of actual opinions in real numbers, and demographically broad; lots of times, they’re associated w/ universities & hired by media, interest groups, etc. Not that that makes them legit, but they probably don’t guarantee political results
 
printer

printer

Well-Known Member
Bagginski said:
Another example of polling distortions introduced by habit & method.

one of the most UNexamined sources of distortion is telephone culture.

we have two distinct such: cell culture & wire culture
Wire culture uses POTS (plain old telephone service) which is wired into the structure of home and office. The people who still maintain POTS lines have a culture of ANSWERING THE PHONE. EVERY time & quickly, if possible. As a result, they answer the phone prepared to interact & respond. They tend to be on average older, more rural, & more politically “conservative”. When engaged by pollsters, they generally attempt to co-operate, which makes them comparatively susceptible to pollsters’ carefully constructed questions. This makes it easy for a hired pollster to accumulate the numbers they want to deliver

Cell culture OTOH treats their phones entirely differently: as likely to ignore or block a caller as to answer (or more so), unique approaches to staying in touch, and no real sense of obligation to answer a call. They are far more disruptive to normal response accumulation, engaging with the pollsters in a challenging / questioning manner. This makes it easy for pollsters to eliminate them from the results.

in the poll in current question, the polling universe was 1200+; we don’t know if this is the number of contacts attempted, or of the accepted responses . This would inevitably involve a split between cell numbers & POTS numbers, and almost certainly result in more accepted conservative responses than theoretically ‘librul’ responses, due entirely to the phone culture involved.

To overcome this would require a structure intended to overcome it, such as making sure cell & POTS responses were *numerically* equivalent. Polling is very similar to telemarketing & direct mail marketing, in that there are lists: specifically, golden lists of numbers/respondents who consistently provide consistent responses (taking polls, GOP/Dem-friendly or hostile, falls for every sales pitch, buys every X, etc). Telemarketers for example LOVE lists of people who predictably spend money on telemarketed stuff - and they PAY TO HAVE THEM.

As I’ve said before, not all polling is even legit: a great deal of political polls are worked up by partisan pollsters-for-hire, seeking to provide their customers with numbers that support the contracted issues/positions. Such pollsters can easily obtain lists by region, by zip code, by state of those who will give the responses the customer wants, and those pollsters make bank

This is the reason some pollsters go out of their way to get a real cross-section of actual opinions in real numbers, and demographically broad; lots of times, they’re associated w/ universities & hired by media, interest groups, etc. Not that that makes them legit, but they probably don’t guarantee political results
Click to expand...
Sorry, should have communicated my thoughts rather than thinking everyone would get it. I meant to show that with roughly the same numbers one article shows it as a negative and the other a positive, more or less. So with the same numbers the news agencies say Ukraine bad, Israel good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top