9 ms·

Even the slightest shadow of a "rules-based international world order" is dead. And all it took was some post-pandemic inflation.

tim333 9mo ago
Just a slight re-write of the rules needed.
tsimionescu 9mo ago
Interestingly, this is not just flaunting international law. It is a blatant violation of federal domestic law in the USA itself: Congress is the only body that can declare war, and they have not done so. The Presidency has no right whatsoever to attack a foreign country without a declaration of war. While yes, Congress authorized the "War on Terror", there is very obviously no possible justification for applying that to the case of Venezuela.
- pjc50 9mo ago
  > Congress is the only body that can declare war, and they have not done so. People keep saying that, and it bears no relation to the actual post-WW2 US military history. How many declared wars have there been since then?
  - whycome 9mo ago
    When people wanted “no more wars” this isn’t what they meant…
    - pjc50 9mo ago
      Anyone who voted for him on that basis was the sort of sucker who loses poker games to five year olds.
      - estearum 9mo ago
        Or virtually any other basis
- Ancapistani 9mo ago
  > The Presidency has no right whatsoever to attack a foreign country without a declaration of war. That’s… just not true. George Washington himself authorized the US Navy to attack French vessels in the Caribbean in 1798 - with no declaration of war.
  - verzali 9mo ago
    > The Congress shall have Power... > To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations; > To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; > To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; > To provide and maintain a Navy; > To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; > To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
    - Ancapistani 9mo ago
      I’m quite familiar. My point is that —- regardless of appropriateness —- this is about as far from “unprecedented” as can be imagined. Congress didn’t declare ware on Syria, or Iraq, or Yemen, or Somalia, or any number of other African countries when the US attacked them during the Biden administration.
      - verzali 9mo ago
        So the constitution is worthless then?
        Ancapistani 9mo ago
        That’s not what I was saying, but I didn’t argue when smarter men than I said exactly that: But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist. - Lysander Spooner
- JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
  > It is a blatant violation of federal domestic law War Powers Act of '73.
  - moralestapia 9mo ago
    Nah. Not war. It's some sort of DOJ operation. Wait and see.
    - herewulf 9mo ago
      Ah yes, using the Coast Guard's aircraft carrier, stealth fighters, and their famous "Delta Force" commandos. I bet they even got a warrant to kick in Maduro's door and read him his rights!
sedan_baklazhan 9mo ago
"Rules-based international world order" consists of just two rules: 1. The Western countries (basically meaning USA makes the decision) may attack any country. 2. Other countries may not defend themselves nor attack any country. Iraq, Iraq (several separate agressions on Iraq, that is not a typo), Afghanistan, Cuba, Serbia, Libya, Sirya, Venezuela... the list goes on, Venezuela is of no particular significance here.
- majgr 9mo ago
  > nor attack any country It is not like citizens of Iran decide to attack Israel or like sponsoring terrorist orgs attacking Israel. I am not sure if Russians freely vote in referendum to attack Ukraine. These decisions are made by despots ruling these countries and then their citizens suffer. Either they die in trenches or suffer economic misery. What for? China too can live without Taiwan. Chinese people do not need to have another island belonging to their country. Only despots wants to have statues raised after them, or write their names in history books, because all other things: Power, Money, Sex they already have.
  - int_19h 9mo ago
    It's true that Russians didn't vote to attack Ukraine. Nevertheless, the invasion had broad popular support at the beginning.
    - gloosx 9mo ago
      >the invasion had broad popular support at the beginning. According to whom? You should understand that public opinion surveys in authoritarian countries are problematic. In autocracies, people might want to hide their opinions and give socially desirable answers that conform to the official government position for fear of facing repression or deviating from the consensus view.
      - int_19h 9mo ago
        According to my own relatives, friends, and acquaintances in Russia, where I'm from. You don't need to tell me about "hiding opinions". The majority support is regardless of all that, though.
Gud 9mo ago
I wouldn't call it "some inflation". The living standard of the western middle class has been on the decline for a long, long time.
- estearum 9mo ago
  No it hasn't. Expectations are higher, competition is stiffer, and the gap between bottom and top end has grown, but by and large (especially in the US), the middle class quality of life has gone up. Obviously specific regions that failed to transition out of low value-add manufacturing and agriculture have suffered, but the vast majority of Americans live in cities doing or supporting high value work.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 9mo ago
    > the middle class quality of life has gone up. As long as you don't try to buy a house. I see kids, right out of college, making more than I ever made, at the peak of my career, unable to afford a house.
    - estearum 9mo ago
      Yes this is a big problem but a large part of this is the total elimination of starter homes from the market. I.e. they would be able to afford the types of homes that earlier generations started in, but those homes simply don't exist anymore. It's kind of a quality of life degradation, but it's a bit more complex than just "an attainable item is no longer attainable." It has never been normal to buy a 2600 sqft, 4 bedroom home at the start of a career.
      - deleted 9mo ago
        [deleted]
      - epistasis 9mo ago
        It's not that starter homes were eliminated or were torn down, it's that construction stopped in cities. The downzonings of prior generations, combined with the limited ability to expand by car travel, finally hit its limit and the urban planning apparatus was in complete capture of people who didn't want the built environment to change.
TiredOfLife 9mo ago
2014 was before covid.
volleyball 9mo ago
"Rules-based order" just means Washington makes up the rules and gives out the orders. The very phrase hints at its conceit. Why "Rules-based order" instead of "International law" ? Its because International law is something concrete, something you can point to and hold up as a standard. International law means UN, ICC, Geneva conventions, votes and parlimentary procedure. It means accountability and uniform application of said law. "Rules-based order" just gives a slightest hint of legitimacy while Washington and its cronies do whatever they want. "Rules-based order" means that the United States can invoke the Monroe Doctrine in Venezuela, Cuba and all over its "backyard" i.e. South America, but Russia doing the same in Ukraine or China doing it in Taiwan is an affront to civillization. What changed more recently is the mask has slipped off. They don't even pretend to give a plausible reason anymore because noone will ever buy it so why bother. "All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force." That is what we are witnessing now.
- tempodox 9mo ago
  > What changed more recently is the mask has slipped off. The mask has been off since the ICC came into existence (at the latest). The reason why the U.S. don’t recognize the ICC is because they know they’d be defendants there one second after.
  - volleyball 9mo ago
    I will admit i was slow to catch on. But watching the whole abominable horror show laid out - Gaza, Ukraine, Epstein, Trump coins, resorts, and ballrooms. Seeing the Nobel prize being given to the woman literally calling for Trump to invade her country and take their oil and cheering as her countrymen get bombed. And then seeing the media and liberal elites spin it as a snub against Trump as she dedicates the prize to him. I am ashamed that i was taken in for so long.
dgellow 9mo ago
It has been a coordinated effort by a portion of republicans for the past decade. It didn’t happen just because of the pandemic

tim333 9mo ago

Just a slight re-write of the rules needed.

tsimionescu 9mo ago

Interestingly, this is not just flaunting international law. It is a blatant violation of federal domestic law in the USA itself: Congress is the only body that can declare war, and they have not done so. The Presidency has no right whatsoever to attack a foreign country without a declaration of war. While yes, Congress authorized the "War on Terror", there is very obviously no possible justification for applying that to the case of Venezuela.

pjc50 9mo ago
> Congress is the only body that can declare war, and they have not done so. People keep saying that, and it bears no relation to the actual post-WW2 US military history. How many declared wars have there been since then?
- whycome 9mo ago
  When people wanted “no more wars” this isn’t what they meant…
  - pjc50 9mo ago
    Anyone who voted for him on that basis was the sort of sucker who loses poker games to five year olds.
    - estearum 9mo ago
      Or virtually any other basis
Ancapistani 9mo ago
> The Presidency has no right whatsoever to attack a foreign country without a declaration of war. That’s… just not true. George Washington himself authorized the US Navy to attack French vessels in the Caribbean in 1798 - with no declaration of war.
- verzali 9mo ago
  > The Congress shall have Power... > To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations; > To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; > To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; > To provide and maintain a Navy; > To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; > To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
  - Ancapistani 9mo ago
    I’m quite familiar. My point is that —- regardless of appropriateness —- this is about as far from “unprecedented” as can be imagined. Congress didn’t declare ware on Syria, or Iraq, or Yemen, or Somalia, or any number of other African countries when the US attacked them during the Biden administration.
    - verzali 9mo ago
      So the constitution is worthless then?
      - Ancapistani 9mo ago
        That’s not what I was saying, but I didn’t argue when smarter men than I said exactly that: But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist. - Lysander Spooner
JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
> It is a blatant violation of federal domestic law War Powers Act of '73.
- moralestapia 9mo ago
  Nah. Not war. It's some sort of DOJ operation. Wait and see.
  - herewulf 9mo ago
    Ah yes, using the Coast Guard's aircraft carrier, stealth fighters, and their famous "Delta Force" commandos. I bet they even got a warrant to kick in Maduro's door and read him his rights!

sedan_baklazhan 9mo ago

"Rules-based international world order" consists of just two rules: 1. The Western countries (basically meaning USA makes the decision) may attack any country. 2. Other countries may not defend themselves nor attack any country. Iraq, Iraq (several separate agressions on Iraq, that is not a typo), Afghanistan, Cuba, Serbia, Libya, Sirya, Venezuela... the list goes on, Venezuela is of no particular significance here.

majgr 9mo ago
> nor attack any country It is not like citizens of Iran decide to attack Israel or like sponsoring terrorist orgs attacking Israel. I am not sure if Russians freely vote in referendum to attack Ukraine. These decisions are made by despots ruling these countries and then their citizens suffer. Either they die in trenches or suffer economic misery. What for? China too can live without Taiwan. Chinese people do not need to have another island belonging to their country. Only despots wants to have statues raised after them, or write their names in history books, because all other things: Power, Money, Sex they already have.
- int_19h 9mo ago
  It's true that Russians didn't vote to attack Ukraine. Nevertheless, the invasion had broad popular support at the beginning.
  - gloosx 9mo ago
    >the invasion had broad popular support at the beginning. According to whom? You should understand that public opinion surveys in authoritarian countries are problematic. In autocracies, people might want to hide their opinions and give socially desirable answers that conform to the official government position for fear of facing repression or deviating from the consensus view.
    - int_19h 9mo ago
      According to my own relatives, friends, and acquaintances in Russia, where I'm from. You don't need to tell me about "hiding opinions". The majority support is regardless of all that, though.

Gud 9mo ago

I wouldn't call it "some inflation". The living standard of the western middle class has been on the decline for a long, long time.

estearum 9mo ago
No it hasn't. Expectations are higher, competition is stiffer, and the gap between bottom and top end has grown, but by and large (especially in the US), the middle class quality of life has gone up. Obviously specific regions that failed to transition out of low value-add manufacturing and agriculture have suffered, but the vast majority of Americans live in cities doing or supporting high value work.
- ChrisMarshallNY 9mo ago
  > the middle class quality of life has gone up. As long as you don't try to buy a house. I see kids, right out of college, making more than I ever made, at the peak of my career, unable to afford a house.
  - estearum 9mo ago
    Yes this is a big problem but a large part of this is the total elimination of starter homes from the market. I.e. they would be able to afford the types of homes that earlier generations started in, but those homes simply don't exist anymore. It's kind of a quality of life degradation, but it's a bit more complex than just "an attainable item is no longer attainable." It has never been normal to buy a 2600 sqft, 4 bedroom home at the start of a career.
    - deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
    - epistasis 9mo ago
      It's not that starter homes were eliminated or were torn down, it's that construction stopped in cities. The downzonings of prior generations, combined with the limited ability to expand by car travel, finally hit its limit and the urban planning apparatus was in complete capture of people who didn't want the built environment to change.

TiredOfLife 9mo ago

2014 was before covid.

volleyball 9mo ago

"Rules-based order" just means Washington makes up the rules and gives out the orders. The very phrase hints at its conceit. Why "Rules-based order" instead of "International law" ? Its because International law is something concrete, something you can point to and hold up as a standard. International law means UN, ICC, Geneva conventions, votes and parlimentary procedure. It means accountability and uniform application of said law. "Rules-based order" just gives a slightest hint of legitimacy while Washington and its cronies do whatever they want. "Rules-based order" means that the United States can invoke the Monroe Doctrine in Venezuela, Cuba and all over its "backyard" i.e. South America, but Russia doing the same in Ukraine or China doing it in Taiwan is an affront to civillization. What changed more recently is the mask has slipped off. They don't even pretend to give a plausible reason anymore because noone will ever buy it so why bother. "All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force." That is what we are witnessing now.

tempodox 9mo ago
> What changed more recently is the mask has slipped off. The mask has been off since the ICC came into existence (at the latest). The reason why the U.S. don’t recognize the ICC is because they know they’d be defendants there one second after.
- volleyball 9mo ago
  I will admit i was slow to catch on. But watching the whole abominable horror show laid out - Gaza, Ukraine, Epstein, Trump coins, resorts, and ballrooms. Seeing the Nobel prize being given to the woman literally calling for Trump to invade her country and take their oil and cheering as her countrymen get bombed. And then seeing the media and liberal elites spin it as a snub against Trump as she dedicates the prize to him. I am ashamed that i was taken in for so long.

dgellow 9mo ago

It has been a coordinated effort by a portion of republicans for the past decade. It didn’t happen just because of the pandemic