Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jimmy Carter has died

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 879 posts

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#761

Post by FrustratedMonky »

tgma wrote: post #759
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These articles aren't painting the condemning picture I think you are thinking they do. If someone becomes president, and a foreign government is already falling apart, and you talk about options and what might become the new government, does that automatically make it your fault? The Shah wasn't a saint, and kind of created the situation. If you want to place blame for Iran, it might need to go further back to Eisen…

That is just your narrative. The incident was a disasterous foreign policy and very direct and it backfired on him very quickly too (I frankly rather not further debate this on a gratitude thread out of respect for his supporters but we could go ad nauseum). You can add all the color you want to soothe your pain and paint your own hero in the story as an unmistakeable saint, meanwhile kicking every other leader down…

Wow. I didn't realize the narrative on the right had gotten this bad.

Did you forget that Reagan negotiated with Terrorist during an election to keep the hostage's hostage? To literally sabotage their freedom to tank Carter?

"kicking every other leader down for basic decisions they had to make for the good of their people"

So, all other leaders, face difficult decisions, but Carter, he has to be held to higher standard? His decisions were not "basic decisions they had to make"? But others were? Like all others were backed into a corner, but not Carter? Did you see my post, he inherited the mess.

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#762

Post by tgma »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #761
tgma wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is just your narrative. The incident was a disasterous foreign policy and very direct and it backfired on him very quickly too (I frankly rather not further debate this on a gratitude thread out of respect for his supporters but we could go ad nauseum). You can add all the color you want to soothe your pain and paint your own hero in the story as an unmistakeable saint, meanwhile kicking every other leader down…

Wow. I didn't realize the narrative on the right had gotten this bad. Did you forget that Reagan negotiated with Terrorist during an election to keep the hostage's hostage? To literally sabotage their freedom to tank Carter? "kicking every other leader down for basic decisions they had to make for the good of their people" So, all other leaders, face difficult decisions, but Carter, he has to be held to higher standa…

You lost me at "narrative on the right" ad hominem. I am so sorry to let you now not everyone is coming from a US centric view. Please continue your idol worship. I'm done here sorry for the interruption.

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#764

Post by brailsafe »

sanderjd wrote: post #410
kridsdale1 wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, the parts Stalin didn’t win.

FDR, Stalin, and Churchill all won that war. History is super messy!

Team America to the rescue! But it does seem like without FDR it would have been won for the allies anyway.

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#765

Post by euroderf »

When he ran for prez he had lots & lots of great ideas. But IIRC the congressional seniority system was still in place, and when Carter got in, the Democratic-controlled Congress stonewalled him on basically everything. You know. "Politics as usual."

I remember a discussion in grad school in the mid-80s. Reaganite fever was the order of the day. I stated my belief that history would be kind to Jimmy Carter. Some people in the class openly laughed at this.

But we know now that Carter had some bad luck and that Reagan set the country on course for its current worship of ignorance, cruelty, corrupted "Christianity", and authoritarianism. Plus plenty of people lining their pockets.

Of course nowadays nobody mentions Reagan any more because the Cult of Reagan has been replaced by Führerprinzip.

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#766

Post by FrustratedMonky »

tgma wrote: post #762
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #761

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. I didn't realize the narrative on the right had gotten this bad. Did you forget that Reagan negotiated with Terrorist during an election to keep the hostage's hostage? To literally sabotage their freedom to tank Carter? "kicking every other leader down for basic decisions they had to make for the good of their people" So, all other leaders, face difficult decisions, but Carter, he has to be held to higher standa…

You lost me at "narrative on the right" ad hominem. I am so sorry to let you now not everyone is coming from a US centric view. Please continue your idol worship. I'm done here sorry for the interruption.

Not a fan of this new trend where any response is called 'ad-hominem' and then quit like you are claiming a high ground.

How do I know where you are from? If it sounds like a 'right' talking point, then that is what it sounds like isn't it? I'm guessing the same views can be in multiple countries. There are people on the 'right' in other countries, maybe I'm German?

Also, not a fan of how you edited your post after my response, to clean it up and appear more generous than it was originally.

But, to continue the argument. Are you saying that when the US staged a Coup to put the Shah in power, that was ok. But then later when it fell apart under Carter, it was more his responsibility for not further backing the Shah? Like it was the US pulling support for the Shah that caused the Revolution.?

To help, what Incident are you referring to? I looked at the links you supplied and couldn't find anything directly attributed to Carter.

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#767

Post by aguaviva »

edanm wrote: post #723
aprilthird2021 wrote: post #712

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say colonizers. Also Israel's Jewish population is made up majorly of people not tied to Europe / the Holocaust. Those latter are the minority. Again, a state built around one ethnicity that by its founding requires people of a separate ethnicity who were equally living in the same land to become stateless, that's wrong and should not happen. Now, the Holocaust is nearing 100 years old, does the raison d'etr…

> Also Israel's Jewish population is made up majorly of people not tied to Europe / the Holocaust. Those latter are the minority. The majority were largely refugees that were ethnically cleansed from the Arab world, so not sure that really changes anything. > Again, a state built around one ethnicity that by its founding requires people of a separate ethnicity who were equally living in the same land to become statel…

Israel's founding did not require anyone to become stateless.

Only that they have no meaningful rights of self-determination within the proposed Jewish State.

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#768

Post by mulmen »

InsideOutSanta wrote: post #719
mulmen wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is also a major reason why Trump got elected: people have so little trust in the current system that they'd rather vote for somebody who promises to break it, than for somebody who promises to improve it. I agree this is what appears to have happened but I still can’t follow the logic. What happens next? Who builds the next system and why should we expect it will be any better?

My impression is that a lot of people are just hoping for everything to go to hell to the point where fundamental changes become inevitable, and they're assuming that these fundamental changes will likely be beneficial to them. I'm not sure if this is evidence of how bad people think the status quo is, or if it is evidence of how naive most people are.

> they're assuming that these fundamental changes will likely be beneficial to them.

This is the part that confuses me. I have met a few “burn it down” types but never heard one articulate why that would work out well in the long run. I’m only assuming they even thought that far ahead.

The only people who can tell me why they voted for Trump are people who want his specific brand of incremental change.

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#769

Post by jliptzin »

rbetts wrote: post #483
jliptzin wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone already has it, the cost is just absorbed by the public instead of being taken out of the taxes of the person receiving the emergency care, assuming they can’t afford the hospital bill.

Many studies find that a majority of personal bankruptcies in the US involve medical debt with some estimates of ~500,000 medical-cost contributed bankruptcies per year. A hospital (might) not kick you to the curb if you are dying in their emergency room. However, this is not the same as catastrophic coverage.

It is functionally the same for the recipient of the medical care who wouldn’t be able to afford it out of pocket. You get the medical care, and you don’t pay for it. Then declare bankruptcy if you have to.

Re: Jimmy Carter has died

#770

Post by jliptzin »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #518
jliptzin wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone already has it, the cost is just absorbed by the public instead of being taken out of the taxes of the person receiving the emergency care, assuming they can’t afford the hospital bill.

> taken out of the taxes of the person receiving the emergency care, if it's that catastropic, I imagine their income would fall drastically that year, or years. What taxes?

Taxes from their income they’ve been paying their whole lives
Post reply on HN