30 points

Are they seriously trying to paint the mass production of AI powered war drones, while hinting they’d be useful in war against China, as a good thing?!

Político is written my actual morons.

permalink
report
reply
-19 points

Not just morons, paid DNC shills.

Granted, there’s a lot of overlap, including on Politico.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Politico is owned by Axel Springer, the media house that publishes the definitive unabashed, populist arch-conservative newspaper in Germany.

They are so unabashedly right wing, that they regularly bend and break journalistic rules and get sanctioned by the German press council for their violation of standard journalism ethics.

Today, Germans say they trust Bild significantly less than other German media sources.

This newspaper is an organ of perfidity. It is wrong to read it. Anyone who contributes to this newspaper is totally socially unacceptable. It would be wrong to be friendly or even polite to any of its editors. You have to be as unfriendly to them as the law allows. They are bad people who do wrong. - Max Goldt

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points
*

Not “they”, but Paul McLeary, the Politico defence reporter. Each point on the list is essentially an opinion piece by one of their journalists.

And it’s not necessarily saying it’s a good thing: It’s a thing you might have missed. You could also question whether “the U.S. is producing more oil than anytime in history” is supposed to be a good thing.

Furthermore, as to McLeary’s point: Some - such as anyone in the region except the Chinese - might argue it’s important that the influence of China in the South China Sea is balanced out by other powerful players. It’s not about going to war with China, it’s about the continued independence of Taiwan and other fairly fragile balances in the region. It doesn’t take a moron to see that the situation is complex.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

And it’s not necessarily saying it’s a good thing

Did you actually read the article? They very clearly say it would be a major win for Biden.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Tech firms and lawmakers still want more specifics on how this is all supposed to work. But if things go as planned, the success of the program would be a major win for the White House, which has been eager to display American technological and industrial might.

So, if it goes according to plan and is a success, it would be a major political victory for the White House/Biden in terms of their eagerness to “display American technological and industrial might”.

It’s something they want to do, and which if this goes as planned, they will manage to do it. Hence, in politics, a “win”. This is different from passing normative judgment as to whether or not it’s a good thing: It’s a win in the same sense destroying the Supreme Court was a “win” for the previous White House.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Given that many independent voters were Republicans and conservatives love war, this is a positive. It demonstrates that Biden isn’t lax on national security and has an eye on the future when his Republican critics constantly attack him over the subject. Democrats will vote for Joe over Trump, but independents and waffling Republicans are in play.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

If you believe we need to have the best technology to defend ourselves, and potential rivals are already pursuing this, yes. US has always tried to stay ahead in technology and this is no different than the latest stealth fighter, or vtol, or aircraft carrier or tank or missile or satellite or submarine or secure communications or radar system or even the best airlift or inflight refueling. The first wave of drone development was a huge success, as was what we were able to send Ukraine. Why wouldn’t we apply the same strategy to a new wave of same technology, and be mostly genuine in saying this will save American and allied lives?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This might be shocking to you, but those of us outside of the states don’t exactly think of your military power as the good guys by any stretch of the imagination.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Not at all, your interests don’t always align with mine, and any use of force has downsides. But of course I’ll usually prefer that my country not be at the mercy of someone else’s use of force.

I’ll also say that humanity is flawed, violent, ruled by baser emotions and …… one of the benefits of it being the US over some other possibilities is that we’re all (especially us citizens) free, even encouraged, to speak up where we have concerns. If you have a specific conflict in mind, I’d just like to suggest such things are never simple or straightforward: try to look at the conflicting requirements and goals, as well as history of the conflict

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Pandora’s AI war drone box has pretty much been opened so might as well get ahead of the curve. More important than the utility in an actual war is the function of weapons as a deterrent to show that it’s not worth fighting a war.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yes because you guys have been so responsible with your drone warfare in the past.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’m a fan, for one. Fuck China. Fuck Russia.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Respectfully - with that attitude, we’ll never be at peace.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

We’ll never be at peace anyway. If we lay down our weapons, our enemies will not do the same. They’ll just conquer us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I’ll be happy to be at peace with a country who also wants peace. Russia and China do not want peace. Their actions have overwhelmingly proven this. Rolling over to let them do whatever they want in the name of the paradox of tolerance is how we got here in the first place.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The US can suck a fat one too while we’re at it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

Jesus christ, Politico.

permalink
report
reply
-30 points
*

Anything but fix real problems.

I don’t give a fuck about the paint on a fucking airplane

permalink
report
reply
41 points

I’d say you didn’t read the article, but the Air Force One paint is smack in the middle of the article with 29 other things that actually do fix real problems.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points
*

I mean, whoever reads the article would also see that they did a similar piece on Trump, listing both positive and negative achievements of his presidency.

I think it’s a cool format. The media cycle tends to blow one single story out of proportions while neglecting anything else that happens, this is (imo) a good way to review some of what’s been happening the last four years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-22 points
*

Drones for China doesn’t fix healthcare.

Downvotes wont fix income inequality, chuds, just like Biden.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Biden can’t unilaterally fix healthcare. He would need congress to cooperate with him and he has never been able to get that. He couldn’t even pass the bills he wanted that did pass without major changes.

It amazes me what people think presidents have the power to do. They’re not absolute monarchs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

How about border security? Oh, Republicans torched that because Big Cheeto told them to? Must be Bifen’s fault!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Making medicine easier to get via telemedicine and insulin caps certainly help though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Putting mushrooms on a hamburger won’t fix housing affordability, but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

Lmao

permalink
report
reply
-2 points

Careful…. This will upset the kids.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Ooh. Preemptive deployment of the most common centrist thought-terminating cliche.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

How do you not bore yourself with this drivel?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Liberals love to infantilize don’t they?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

When all one sees are infants……

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Why would anyone be upset that Biden issued an executive order to start the process of legalizing weed? Or that renewable power is now the number 2 source of electricity in the country?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Because here on lemmy, the kids like to ignore everything good something is in favor of the one or two bad things and then elevate that to ridiculous levels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Because “US Bad” is the fundamental thought process of a lot of lemmings

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 480K

    Comments