MigL

By 'we', I mean us on this forum, not idiots like T Cruz. I am pretty sure most of us, on this forum ( Just to be clear ), expect a much saner Presidency with J Biden.

France actually withdrew from the NATO command structure for a period of almost 2 decades, but remained an ally. They are now again fully in, but more than any other member state, have chosen a 'go it alone' policy to weapon systems and development. They are in fact, the only NATO country, other than the US, to have their own nuclear deterrent, and the ability to deliver; the 'Force de Frappe'. Others like the UK and Germany have US nukes, which they have the means to deliver, but require US permission

Why do people keep bringing up past practice when discussing J Biden's selection criteria? Or rather, his pre-announced ( for public consumption ? ) selection criteria, which may be different from the actual ( i would hope ). Society is supposed to be progressing, for the better. 200 years ago, America had slavery; that cannot be used to justify racism today. Saying that was the way it was done, or asking why no-one complained about it then, is really bad use of 'whataboutism'. And comparisons with the Trump administration are really setting the bar low ... I would hope we all expect much better from J Biden.

This is a thread where we are discussing an on-going war that has killed thousands and displaced millions from their homes. Yet some of us think it wise to devote a whole page to discussion about who knows what, or who didn't answer a question, in an attempt to one-up each other in a discussion forum. Petty squabbles should not be this important ( even to you guys involved ), stay focused on the big picture ( Ukrainian- Russian squabble ). Again ? Maybe LaurieAG will say "Make up your mind, France"

I speak English, Italian, French, and can understand some Spanish ... Can I get some SLBM with MIRV nuclear warheads, and a submarine to carry them. Sometimes you need deterrence with your neighbors. I use my backyard for barbeques, and ICBMs would just get in the way.

As a matter of fact, yes. Ever since I was a little kid, I've always wanted to fly jet planes. Unfortunately I've been severely myopic since the age of 6, lost vision in my left eye at the age of 35 when I was diagnosed with glaucoma, had several filtering operations, cataracts, and two eye drops twice a day in my fight to keep what little vision I have left. So I know very well what I'm capable of doing; even my work knows that when I call in sick, I actually can't see well enough to drive in bad weather. I had to settle for being very interested in modern military aviation, and considered attending the University of Toronto for Aerospace Engineering, rather than Physics Not in making the selection. But in announcing beforehand that those are the candidates he is looking for. Does that exclude other candidates who are domiciled? I don't know; but it certainly 'looks' that way.

That is certainly very accurate, and my understanding also. Parse your quoted sentence very carefully, and tell me how it differs from J Biden's pre-announcement " I will pick a black woman for SCJ" ( paraphrased ).

I beg to differ. I'm visually impaired ( only see with one eye , and glaucoma in the other ) and barely able to drive, with no depth perception; I'm not discriminated against if told I cannot fly a plane. I Know I'm incapable of doing so. When did inability to do something become a discrimination ( in the accepted use of the word ) ? To be clear, just in case some are misunderstanding, I think KBJ is extremely qualified, and an excellent choice. But some people are of the opinion that preannouncing his criteria, of skin color and gender, looks bad. And those people are entitled to an opinion and a vote also, no matter how much INow protests that it's 'made up' outrage.

Well this Pollyanna certainly complained about the partisan actions of the Trump administration. I didn't have much to complaina about the Obama administration, and wasn't a member during the GW Bush administration. Or did you mean another Pollyanna ? That is not discrimination; that is inability. And i'n not saying KBJ isn't extremely capable, but that stating beforehand that you will pick a black woman gives the impression that you are discriminating ( or choosing ) according to skin color and gender. In both cases it is how things appear to the masses. Sure, but why announce it beforehand; it gives the impression that qualifications don't matter, just skin color and gender. IOW, whether true or not, bad optics.

Already addressed this ...

Maybe to you, but a certain percentage of the male population happens to find males more attractive, regardless of hair color 😃 . We must have dated the same women, Moon 😃 . I'm sorry, I just can't take these kinds of threads seriously ...

I know what you are trying to say, but to a lot of people, the example you are setting is that you can discriminate ( or sort/select ) according to skin color and gender. J Biden, making the exact same choice, but not announcing his selection criteria beforehand, would not produce the same bad optics.

Nice post Markus. After Icarus' first post, I had trouble following what he was saying also. Maybe if Icarus were to sum up his thoughts in a couple of paragraphs so we could understand where he is trying to go, then follow up with the mathematics, if required.

I'm sure everyone is waiting with baited breath for my opinion ... I'm sure KBJ will be an excellent Justice, and is extremely well quaified, but SCJustices are not supposed to represent specific groups of people; they are supposed to represent ALL people. And while a black woman is a welcome addition, why was there a need for J Biden, to announce beforehand, that the selection criteria would be based on skin tone ( not race ) and gender ? Bad optics. Unlike some of the others, I don't find it very offensive that this was a color/gender , for appearance, motivated selection. What is offensive, to me anyway, is the selection based on political leaning of the candidate. Whoever is in power tries to change the make-up of the SC, not necessarily for the good of the country, but for their own political party. As far as I'm concerned, the SC should not be politicized. Ken said it on the first page of this discussion ... Yes, of couse it's been done for a couple of hundred years, but tell me, how's that working out for you guys ? Maybe it's time to try a new approach ? And I'm still disappointed that some people choose to make their argument with demerit points, rather than reasoned thinking.

It has been my experience that most red-headed women have freckles on their boobs, which I personally don't find very attractive. But that's just a personal preference, and i'm known to be very shallow.

I find it sad that you have criticism for the actions of the Ukrainian President, US actions in the Middle East as well as WW1 and WW2, and even the French ( ? ), yet not one word of criticism for the idiot whose actions are the root cause of so many dead Ukrainians and Russians, V Putin. Blame anyone but the real culprit. Sad, and telling, that you and he think alike.

I don't think he'll ever understand, JC. NATO is a defensive military alliance which, through Article 5, helps prevent what is happening in the Ukraine. You don't see Russia invading Romania, Poland or the Baltic states do you ? They only invade or threaten non-NATO states like Ukraine and Finland. And then Mistermack, and Russia, wonder why those countries want to join a defensive alliance.

Another day, another fanatic wasting his time ( and ours ).

I would think the refugees from the Ukraine know very well who is committing the atrocities. A lot of them are feeing to Poland, and a forum member who I trust and respect, and who has had contact with the refugees, doesn't seem too impressed with the behaviour of the Russians. There is a very simple way to stop any atrocities committed by Russians, and Ukrainians, Serge. Get Russian forces the hell out of the sovereign country of the Ukraine.

The odds for the lottery are much much worse, yet people still play it. Hope is a very strong emotional motivator. Some people ( I don't currently, but you never know ) need that motivator; who am I to deny them that, when hope is all they have left. Don't make me quote The Shawshank Redemption again.

Russians have now stated that if Finland tries to join NATO there could be 'dire' consequences. Gee whiz! What could possibly make them want to join NATO ?

If Religion is defined as the belief in omnipotent supernatural beings, and other supernatural planes of existence, then NO, there is no rationality to that belief. And Beecee has provided the definition of rationality which makes this self-evident. Do you wish to alter the definition of 'rational' or 'religion' ? If, on the other hand, you are asking about the need, use, or function of Religion, then YES, at some stage of a society's evolution there could definitely be a rational reason for its existence, as it provides a moral compass for people who may not have developed one yet, and gives the leaders of that society a way to control those who may not be very sociably inclined.

Hello ! Yes I have a sense of humor. But Claiming that a defensive alliance like NATO, which has seen new members join of their own free will because they fear an expansionist Russia, is threatening the security of Russia, is akin to claiming women's shelters, where women go to escape abusive men, are a threat to men. Do you find that ironic and humorous also ?

... and Mistermack might have it backwards. The rich get the gravy and avoid incarceration; the poor get the blame and go to jail.

After all the crap that's come out after 'slap-gate', I have come to almost feel sorry for Will Smith. I recently saw a clip from a Red Table ( Jada P Smith's show ) episode, where she and Will calmly discuss her infidelity while Will does his best to keep smiling. On TV, mind ou. Is there no end to this woman's self-centered narcissism ? And his idiot son ( Jayden, named after his mother , how appropriate ) commenting on social media "And that's how we do it". Best course of action for Will, is to be like the 'stereotypical black American father' and abandon his family. ( just kidding; I'm with Chris Rock, and believe we should be able to laugh at our shortcomings and challenges ) And then I remember I don't really care about Hollywood types ...