Live data from Hacker News

America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

theatlantic.com

111–120 of 128 posts

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China has played much much better chess so it's not surprise they're benefiting. They didn't play chess at all, but unlike the USA, they didn't poop on the board and didn't smudge the other players with their drool. We are forgetting now that the belt and road initiative, as well as the wolf warrior diplomacy, had put China on the lowest rankings in global perception. China had to do literally nothing to "play bett…

Let's say the USA does gain control over the Straight of Homuz, wouldn't that be quite an issue for China though? Where would it get it's oil from? I don't agree with what's going on in Iran, I'm just thinking that regardless of whether or not it's a good idea, if the USA is basically in control of all meaningful oil exports, then it's game over for any significant Chinese military action because, they won't have the…

China buys Russian oil via pipeline and tanker, so they’re not entirely dependent on Gulf crude. They also have more levers to pull at the state level to reduce civilian demand on petroleum. Along with current electrification/alternative energy efforts, that could be a significant reduction in demand. Finally, China has operated nuclear subs for decades, and is actually building a nuclear aircraft carrier. China likely does not think it can compete head-to-head with the US in a conventional naval confrontation, and has invested heavily in missile and drone technology, along with other asymmetric capabilities. It would certainly be painful if the US took over the Persian Gulf, but likely not debilitating.

I did find it interesting that in both Venezuela and Iran, Chinese radar and air defense did not hold up so well, but they’re at least getting a lot of real world test data from it.

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many things that are not in the Constitution: the USAF, computers, antibiotics, sea cruises, cars, steak, etc. Not being in the Constitution does not make them unconstitutional. Hope this helps. As for dissolution of those agencies, my answer is: no. You have to ask a question before demanding an answer.

Why not? You literally said "We don't have either in the Constitution so whatever you call it, it has to be removed from power.". What's different about ICE and DHS but not about governments having civil services? Or the other things you listed?

[flagged]

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#113
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is this building where guys wearing masks wheel you into a room behind locked doors at dawn and then use drugs to knock you out. They then take sharp knives and cut you open and rummage around your insides, sometimes taking organs out. Blood goes everywhere. The footage is gory. When they're done with you it may takes you weeks to recover. The rest of just call his "surgery at a hospital". My point is that you'…

In my opinion a 'civil servant' sees their job as serving the American people to the best of their ability even if they don't agree with the outcomes of the latest election. A member of the 'deep state'; however, is ideologically driven. If their favorite party is in power, they use their job to push their ideology to its limits. If the opposition party won the election; then they view their role as a means to 'resis…

> In my opinion a 'civil servant' sees their job as serving the American people to the best of their ability even if they don't agree with the outcomes of the latest election.

Sure, but a bunch of stuff isn't supposed to change just because the president changes. It's supposed to take laws to change it, or even amendments. If those haven't been passed and the President tries to do that stuff anyway, we should want our civil servants to resist that.

The contrary notion is the Unitary Executive, which is that the president should be absolute dictator of what the executive branch does, with legality to be sorted out elsewhere even in egregious cases. This notion is very bad and we should not let it become normal, especially in a world where we've already seen absolutely insane rulings that place the president personally above the law.

If the executive is empowered by the legislative, we should not want civil servants to do gladly do every thing a president might ask of them. If the president is instead possessed by default of unlimited power to direct the executive branch and it's the legislative branch's job to reign in that boundless power (until the president ignores the law, then it's the judicial's job to finally make the executive knock it off one or more years later) then we would want totally obedient (to the president) civil servants. However, this latter idea is stupid and bad, so, we should want civil servants that don't treat the president's word as law, but the law as law.

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#114
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The constitution says the president must "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed". That means hiring people to enforce the laws, that's the civil servant system.

That means the whole Executive branch is the president and if he can delegate his power to some other people he also should be able to revoke the delegation and fire those people, which is not the case now. The president is semi-successful in firing these "servants" and some judges insist that it's illegal.

It's illegal because of the Civil Service Act, not because of the Constitution.

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That means the whole Executive branch is the president and if he can delegate his power to some other people he also should be able to revoke the delegation and fire those people, which is not the case now. The president is semi-successful in firing these "servants" and some judges insist that it's illegal.

It's illegal because of the Civil Service Act, not because of the Constitution.

[flagged]

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? You literally said "We don't have either in the Constitution so whatever you call it, it has to be removed from power.". What's different about ICE and DHS but not about governments having civil services? Or the other things you listed?

[flagged]

What are institutions made of? Aliens from Mars?

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? You literally said "We don't have either in the Constitution so whatever you call it, it has to be removed from power.". What's different about ICE and DHS but not about governments having civil services? Or the other things you listed?

[flagged]

>the comment you replied to literally said "Not being in the Constitution does not make them unconstitutional."

Then why make stupid statements in the first place. I am not a telepath. Thats absolutely not what your original comment said. Why make such stupid comments in the first place and then later lie and say "No I didn't mean that".

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? You literally said "We don't have either in the Constitution so whatever you call it, it has to be removed from power.". What's different about ICE and DHS but not about governments having civil services? Or the other things you listed?

[flagged]

If t hat's bad how do you feel about ICE and DHS or any other agency contracting private companies? They are even less accountable then. Why don't you support banning government agencies from hiring private companies?

Re: America Is Now a Rogue Superpower

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

If t hat's bad how do you feel about ICE and DHS or any other agency contracting private companies? They are even less accountable then. Why don't you support banning government agencies from hiring private companies?

I feel you want to talk about ICE and DHS instead of the topic at hand, the Deep State/"civil service". I feel the government contracting private companies is fine, the government is accountable so are the private companies. I don't support banning government agencies from hiring private companies because I don't see how the country would benefit from have government making everything it uses in the course of executing its duties.
Post reply on HN