Comments by jouris

Obama and Saudis created ISIS in Iraq.
.
You could probably make a decent case that the Saudi clergy created ISIS -- or at least laid the foundations for it. The Saudi government? That would be trickier . . . but feel free to offer some actual evidence if you have it.
.
But suggesting that Obama had anything to do with creating ISIS is the kind of conspiracy theory nonsense that only the nut cases on the US far right believe. I'm guessing that even you, in private, know that it is bullsh*t. I understand that you may be required to push it; just don't expect others to actually believe it.

Russia is a nuclear power able to destroyed any condescending aggressor in a matter of weeks and therefore needs respect and not primitive threats.
.
What you are saying is that Russia should be feared. Respect is a whole different deal -- and Russia has done little to merit that.

In short, armchair Western analysts have never understood Russia very well.
.
Perhaps not. But still, we understand Russia better than you guys understand the West.

just compare Russia today and before Putin.
.
I wouldn't argue that Putin, initially, did some good for Russia. (As you say, someone else might have done better. But also might have done worse.) But that time is long past. At this point, he is doing substantially more harm than good -- including straight-up economically.

You left out rocket launch services, specifically to the International Space Station. While that will continue for a while, there seem to be some private companies in the U.S. working on entering the market. But they aren't there yet.

Say rather, there isn't any organized opposition -- nor likely to be. But you have only to look at current events in Iran to see that that's not quite the same as no opposition.

Why mention Trump? All the influence there has been flowing the other way.

In short, Russia has no realistic chance of getting better until Putin passes from the scene.

In the United States we have seen (and, one would think, shown the world) the consequences of having to pick between two seriously flawed candidates. But perhaps the UK needs to elect Corbyn in order for the lesson to sink home. Pity, that.

Oh I agree completely that separation puts a stress on a marriage. I just thought "bloody carnage" was overstating the level of stress.
.
Stress will contribute to more divorce. But how much? It would be interesting if someone could provide some research to inform our speculations on this specific stress.

It makes me wonder if this decrying of the world as fallen is projection...
.
I think it's just that people generally are uncomfortable with change. That's why there are similar comments about the young by the old for as far back as we have written records. ;-)
.
I do suspect that part of the lower divorce rate is simply that marriage isn't anywhere near as socially mandated as it was when I was young.** A couple can just shack up (is that phrase even in use any more?), without major social consequences -- and find out first whether living together, as opposed to just dating, really works for them. (I'm minded of one couple who did finally get married . . . after living together for 35 years. Which is a bit extreme. But a few years wouldn't raise any eyebrows.) The only real consequence is that you can't file taxes jointly.
.
Simply put, if you don't formally get married, you separation doesn't appear in the divorce rate.
.
** Actually, when I was young, a teenager who got his girlfriend pregnant (birth control not being available) was expected to, and did, marry her. Been a couple of changes in the social fabric since then.

Except that, at least in my observation, military families are no different genetically than the rest of the population.

Would they find carnage if they looked at military families? Who, after all, have been dealing with these issues for a long time.

And yet, military families have been coping with it for decades. So difficult, to be sure, but not impossible.

(double post)

Merry Christmas to you as well, ashbird! Here's to a happy and prosperous New Year for us all.

Just add in universal basic income instead? I confess that alternative had not occurred to me. I'll want to think on that a bit, but at first glance it does appear that it might answer....

That is, indeed, a concern. On the other hand, lack of means testing means we are spending money on folks who don't need it.
.
I'm not sure what the solution is, although I'm pretty sure it will be an imperfect one. Perhaps we just set the threshold high enough that even those who made moderate provision for their own retirement still see some; with just those who got (or were born) really rich don't. In some ways, even a gesture at means testing would go a long way towards avoiding the kind of drastically progressive redistribution backlash that I believe we are otherwise looking at if Ryan realizes his dream to slash entitlements.

My apologies. I saw "blue voters" and read it as "blue state voters." Gotta work on my reading comprehension.

Definitely one of the most cogent quotes on politics of the past quarter century (at least).