Actually, demographic research has shown that Hispanic NYC Democrats are very pro-Trump, so it is plausible that they voted out of anger at the treatment he's received.*
*omg no part of this is true
*omg no part of this is true
figmentPez
Staff member
Soldliers living inside a weapon that blows up entire planets. I don't feel like that has been expressed strongly enough. The Death Star is not just a military base. It is a base whose entire existence is to supply and operate a laser that blows up entire planets. We're not talking about a military base that's engaging in a peacekeeping operation. We're not talking about a military base that's housing troops in training. We're talking about a base that has the sole purpose of blowing up entire planets.
What else do you propose they try? The attack on the Death Star in Ep 4 was a last ditch, desperate effort that still nearly failed. The Death Star had already blown up two planets at that point, Alderaan was home to 2 billion people, and there's no indication that it wasn't going to blow up more.
figmentPez
Staff member
Are those bases travelling around blowing up entire planets? Are those nukes actively being used to blow up entire planets? Is destroying those bases the only way to stop them from blowing up entire planets?...two planets? Someone has been looking too much at the EU
That said, I assume you mean that anyone in or near a base where nukes are stored are fair game? The death star was an allusion to the cold war, after all.
Oh, yes, because one planet would have been fine. "2 billion people, not a problem. Not worth worrying about. Let me know when it becomes a pattern of behavior."...two planets? Someone has been looking too much at the EU
Owning a gun does not automatically make you a supporter of the 2nd Amendment. It is even possible to support the rights of others to own and keep arms while simultaneously refusing to own any of your own.
--Patrick
Don't forget Jedha and Scarif. Sure, they weren't obliterated but they were essentially uninhabitable afterwards....two planets? Someone has been looking too much at the EU
This is the aftermath of Jedha as depicted in the (canon) Star Wars comic.
Ah. Blowing up whole cities in one go - or two - is no issue. Blowing up planets is a problem. Where do you draw the line?
Someone operating a hamburger stand outside of a naval base with nuclear submarines is helping keep those subs in working order, and is thus contributing to making the world a less safe place. Even if it's a pacifist hamburger stand owner who only sells to sailors because he needs to eat, it's still perfectly a-ok to kill him in an air strike on the base because there are nukes there...Or not?
Look, to be fair, obviously this whole discussion is somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Purely realistically, there's no reason ever to have 300K troops in one space station, unless it's intended as a troop transport to conquer whole planets in one go - which is the exact opposite of what the DS tries to accomplish. It's an utterly impractical and illogical weapon.
if we're going about it in any sort of realistic way, the DS perforce has thousands if not tens of thousands of non-voluntary and/or civilian people aboard. You can call them all collateral damage and call it a day - that's military practice, after all. It's pretty much impossible to wipe out a base or a large encampment without hurting (potentially lots of) non-combatants. Some people think collateral should be avoided at all costs, others think "some" collateral damage is acceptable. Once you're in the second group, it all comes down to numbers and haggling.
Nuclear weapons - and the DS - reside firmly in the "forbidden" category of weapons (ABC - atomic, bacterial, chemical) because by their nature, they cannot discriminate. They're used to take out population rather than fighting capability.
But bear in mind: the DS was the largest troop transport, the largest craft carrier, and a very strong blockade vessel capable of blockading half a planet on its own. Most people on there, and most of its mass and space, had absolutely nothing to do with its huge laser.
Sure, but you can do that without a DS, too. Malachor V wasn't bombarded by a Death StarDon't forget Jedha and Scarif. Sure, they weren't obliterated but they were essentially uninhabitable afterwards.
This is the aftermath of Jedha as depicted in the (canon) Star Wars comic.
GasBandit
Staff member
The distilled essence of Halforums!
Dogs and cats, living together.
Mass hysteria!
Friends, the idle brain is the Devil's playground...TROUBLE!
--Patrick
figmentPez
Staff member
Well, blowing up an entire city is pretty over the line... if that city isn't serving as the source of blowing up even bigger cities.[Ah. Blowing up whole cities in one go - or two - is no issue. Blowing up planets is a problem. Where do you draw the line?
BULLSHIT. Even if they didn't work on the laser, they were there to enable to enable the use of the laser. They were part and parcel of a machine whose main aim was to destroy planets.
Maybe if the republic had better healthcare when it existed, people wouldn't be so willing to work for an evil empire just because they provide dental. Do you know how expensive space braces are?
So? The Death Star is what did it. Not sure what your argument is there. The argument that I am backing up is that the Death Star's purpose was to destroy planets, which it did more than once (in-canon, in films)
According to the star wars wiki:
- 27.048 officers
- 774.576 soldiers, pilots and personnel
- 400.000 support troops
- 25.000 Stormtroopers
- 7200 TIE Fighters
If you hadn't noticed, I'm replaying the public debate after the use of the nukes in Japan. Dresden e.a. were used as "proof" that nukes brought nothing new to the table and didn't need extra regulation.
Well, if we get lucky, Clarence Thomas will retire after Republicans lose Congress and then Dems will do like Mitch and deadlock the next nominee for the foreseeable future.
'Merica
figmentPez
Staff member
You can't even acknowledge that the tie fighters are there to protect the laser. I'm done. That's like claiming that support fighters have nothing to do with the bombers they're escorting, so it's immoral to shoot them down during a war.
He's dumb enough, but the Republicans know that would wreck their credibility. Not to mention he's too damn old.
They don't care. The Evangelicals have been waiting for a moment like this and will ram through someone to repeal Roe.
No, I'm afraid the only correct response to any of this is "Our president is currently under investigation for acting as an agent for a foreign power. As such, no vote on a Supreme Court nominee can occur until he has been cleared of these charges."
figmentPez
Staff member
If Trump appoints a judge to the SCOTUS, and either ends the Mueller investigation prematurely, or is eventually found to have colluded with Russia, is his appointment still a valid one? And how do you get a ruling on such a matter when the court is potentially tainted?
As long as the senate confirms the appointment then it stands. IIRC some legal scholars believe that congress can get rid of a justice similar to a president impeachment process, but it’s never been attempted. That would be the only way, aside from resignation or assasination.
Post automatically merged:
That only works if you can control the senate.
It's happened once but he wasn't removed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Chase
Incidentally it was for "letting his partisan leanings affect his court decisions" so fucking lol.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Chase
Incidentally it was for "letting his partisan leanings affect his court decisions" so fucking lol.
Those darn federalists!
Someone else can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think a valid remedy would be to have Congress authorize the President to appoint additional judge(s), effectively diluting or cancelling out any perceived taint. That or passing a constitutional amendment allowing Congress or the Executive to meddle more with the Judicial, which sounds kinda disastrous.
Basically. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the end result of this: Republicans lose control of Congress, Democrats move to have last two nominees removed from the bench.
This has actually been a suggested remedy should the Democrats regain control of the presidency and Congress: Simply authorize more judges for the bench to undo the two tainted seats and simply reduce the number as judges retire. It wouldn't be first time this was done; there were originally only 6 and it's had as many as 10. In fact, Congress has shrank the number of judges more than once and even passed legislation that prevented a sitting president from appoinitng anyone new to the court.
figmentPez
Staff member
And if a Senator is implicated as well? If collusion with Russia happened, it would have involved more of the Republican party than just Trump.
The next highest authority is a constitutional convention:
“The other method of passing an amendment requires a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States. That Convention can propose as many amendments as it deems necessary. Those amendments must be approved by three-fourths of the states.”
So it’s not done by population, which puts the democrats at a distinct disadvantage, being better supported in urban and densely populated areas.
There is no higherauthority. If congress doesn’t impeach the president, remove justices, or senators/representatives, then those people continue working unless enough pressure is applied to get them to resign.
Congress is key, and too much overlooked.
“The other method of passing an amendment requires a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States. That Convention can propose as many amendments as it deems necessary. Those amendments must be approved by three-fourths of the states.”
So it’s not done by population, which puts the democrats at a distinct disadvantage, being better supported in urban and densely populated areas.
There is no higherauthority. If congress doesn’t impeach the president, remove justices, or senators/representatives, then those people continue working unless enough pressure is applied to get them to resign.
Congress is key, and too much overlooked.