« first day (3343 days earlier)      last day (1585 days later) » 

Færd
Færd
7:48 AM
Think of Reagan's state funeral to get an idea of the magnitude of what's going on here.
 
 
7 hours later…
tchrist
tchrist
2:24 PM
38
A: What does Théoden’s quote “Oft evil will shall evil mar” in Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings mean?

BESWThat's exactly what it means. The desires and plans of evil people ("evil will;" "will" in this case being the noun relating to intent and desire) often ("oft") ruin ("mar") the cause of evil. That is, the phrase says that evil people are selfish, petty, and short-sighted, and that this quality...

 
Mitch
Mitch
3:04 PM
@Færd I don't think people filled the streets for Reagan, maybe a few ceremonies in DC with everybody seated in chairs. (that is I don't remember it being a big deal at all)
 
 
1 hour later…
Cerberus
Cerberus
4:25 PM
@Færd I praesume people fill the streets mainly because they are offended at what America did, not because they loved him so much, don't they?
> The end of the evil American presence in West Asia has begun
Let's hope so...
The only good thing they did was helping combat IS...which is the product of their own action anyway.
And the evil they did far outweighs that.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
5:27 PM
@tchrist Yeah, but I can understand why at first the asker felt it didn't fit the context.
 
 
2 hours later…
Felix Crazzolara
Felix Crazzolara
7:07 PM
Hi everyone :)
Is this sentence grammatically correct?
The manipulator was developed for research purposes with the additional goal to be inexpensive to produce.
I'm particularly interested in the "to produce" part. Or would it be "to be produced"?
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
@FelixCrazzolara That is an interesting matter. Summary: both are fine.
Your sentence sounds OK to me.
Maybe I would use a gerund of being after goal.
And a comma after purposes.
 
Felix Crazzolara
Felix Crazzolara
Ok, thank you for the quick response :) So you mean:
The manipulator was developed for research purposes, with the additional goal of being inexpensive to produce.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Yes!
 
Felix Crazzolara
Felix Crazzolara
That sounds great indeed!
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
To be produced is longer and more cumbersome, so, while technically correct, it is best used only where the alternative is not possible.
 
 
2 hours later…
RegDwigнt
RegDwigнt
8:59 PM
-2
Q: Lets me or Let's me

facepalm42Do we use Let's me or Lets me, without the apostrophe. Because if we used the apostrophe, it would mean "Let us me", which wouldn't make sense! Thanks.

apostrophe contractions
Devil's advocate: "Let's me" is perfectly fine actually, if me is being used as a verb.
For example, "Let's me the I" is a perfectly grammatical sentence in English.
And should be way more common as well.
People constantly Iing all their mes is a common overcorrection @Robusto bitterly complained about only recently, and rightfully so.
In other news, here's a 3-minute critique of our concert by the German state radio. Including various bits from the actual performance. I didn't even know they were there. But yeah, you can hear us sing even if you weren't.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
> He makes you do it, or lets you?
— Lets me. But he uses subtle witchcraft to seduce me.
 
Færd
Færd
9:18 PM
@Mitch Ah I'd heard otherwise. What about wall-to-wall eulogizing media coverage?
@Cerberus I think those two are very much interrelated. I can't refer you to a dependable source, but I think he was admired by many Iranians.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
I thought the Revolutionary Guard was not that popular?
But of course I would rally behind political opponents, too, if an important official were killed by a foreign power.
 
Færd
Færd
Not indeed. But the Quds Force, the foreign branch, is thought of as a different entity.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Oh, I see.
I also read that many Iranians were critical of Iran's wide range of foreign operations, that the government should focus less on those and more on internal affairs.
 
Færd
Færd
It's much more related to national pride, and standing up to world powers etc. Which links back to the offence taken from the American assassination attack.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Yes, of course.
It would be the same in almost any country.
Unless the person killed was really, really hated by the large majority.
 
Færd
Færd
9:22 PM
@Cerberus Those grievances are mostly about expenditure, not about victories and conquests.
Rarely morally well-founded sentiments
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Even Khamenei's fiercest opponents, who wanted him to die, probably wouldn't want this to happen by foreign assassination! Only in case of a civil war or a guerilla would that be the case.
 
Færd
Færd
True
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
@Færd Yes, of course.
 
Færd
Færd
But it is a tragedy for the dissidents.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Yeah.
America did what hurt its own interests most.
As usual...
 
Færd
Færd
9:24 PM
Foolish.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Trumpish.
Although Bush or Reagan might have done the same thing...
 
Færd
Færd
Probably. Trump would never know anyone like Soleimani by name. It was somebody else's plan.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Or he responded to neutral info from the army.
Generals would brief him on what is happening in Iraq, and they might say Soleimani organises this and that.
Probably not expecting Trump to act on that information thus.
 
Færd
Færd
@Cerberus Yeah, but I believe you can find a general warmongering trend in the haphazard foolish decisions. Maybe that's not his.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
And/or Pompeo might have recommended it.
@Færd We don't really know whose it is.
Trump himself is weak and erratic.
We know Pompeo is highly aggressive.
I think the army is mostly more moderate.
What do you think Khamenei will do?
He is sad and enraged.
But not crazy.
 
Færd
Færd
9:29 PM
@Cerberus I can't find any genuine anti-war stance anywhere in the government. Those dedicated to war, I know. But the other extreme, maybe just Sanders's gang.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
I don't think killing a high American official is realistic, for several reasons.
@Færd You mean Bernie Sanders?
He's not in government.
Parliament certainly does not want a real war with Iran.
 
Færd
Færd
Yeah
I meant the overall government
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Public opinion normally doesn't either, but I'm not up to date.
The army is usually moderate.
They probably don't want a real war.
The department of war probably doesn't want a war either, except perhaps its highest (Trump-appointed) leaders.
Bolton was sacked, thank Goodness.
 
Færd
Færd
But none of them have a principled opposition to random wars.
They handed over 800 billion dollars to Trumps for his army.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Maybe parliament does, at the moment.
 
Færd
Færd
9:33 PM
I think every senator voted for that.
Possibly except for Sanders.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Americans are crazy about their army.
 
Færd
Færd
@Cerberus I think there will be a political response for now.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
But the lower house has voted against war for quite some time, I believe, and Democrats are now the majority.
 
Færd
Færd
But they are hard-cooking people up for "harsh revenge", so we should wait and see, I guess.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
@Færd No attacks on American military bases?
It must be very frustrating for your government.
 
Færd
Færd
9:34 PM
I just don't know. It's possible that they do it indirectly.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
They could have the Houthis strike an American base.
Or a few oil tankers...
 
Færd
Færd
Through some militia mourning for Soleimani and ready to die for his goal.
Yeah
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Naturally.
So a renegade militia in Iraq could attack American bases, as they already have.
 
Færd
Færd
But even that could easily escalate into catastrophe.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
A continuation of the proxy war.
It could.
I also wonder what Iraq will do.
It is hardly a stable country, but they have voted to expel all American soldiers.
Which could also remove them as targets for the militiae.
 
Færd
Færd
9:37 PM
Their parliament is presenting their government with this bill that says all foreign forces should leave Iraq. It's not binding yet tho.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
But the government itself asked parliament for just that.
So it would be strange for the government not to do it.
 
Færd
Færd
They are going to try to go ahead with it.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
The threat of American sanctions may make them postpone and perhaps weaken the actual execution.
 
Færd
Færd
They'll be supported, if not directed or goaded, by Iran.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
I hope Iraq is stable enough without the Americans there. I think perhaps it will be?
@Færd Of course.
 
Færd
Færd
9:39 PM
@Cerberus The Iranian influence is still huge.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Yeah.
 
Færd
Færd
I certainly hope for a really independent Iraq.
But I don't see that in the near future.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Muqtada al-Sadr is supported by Iran as well, I believe?
 
Færd
Færd
I don't think US forces will completely leave. Some will remain in Iraqi Kurdistan, probably.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
I believe his party is the largest.
 
Færd
Færd
9:40 PM
@Cerberus Yes, generally.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
@Færd Right.
 
Færd
Færd
He has a large following among the Shiites.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Do you think Iran can control Iraq well enough not to let some militia take over and perhaps start a civil war?
We don't want IS all over again...
 
Færd
Færd
But I think Trump has somehow managed to unite the Shiites and the Sunnis against the US as well.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Oh, but I have to go running now.
@Færd Yeah! Could be a good thing in the intermediate future, if they keep it up...
 
Færd
Færd
9:42 PM
Okay talk to you later
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Bai!
 
Færd
Færd
Bye!
 
RegDwigнt
RegDwigнt
0
Q: Is it always necessary to use "and" or "or" at the end of a list?

0129uy5151For example: a, b, c, x, y, and z. a, b, c, x, y or z. Are there any circumstances where it would be acceptable to omit "and" or "or" and simply write: "a, b, c, x, y, z"?

grammaticality
Apparently this person has never heard of France.
Or Louisiana.
Or all the other countries, places, colonies, towns and villages who use "X, Y, Z" as their official motto.
List of national mottos
This page lists state and national mottos for the world's nations. The mottos for some states lacking general international recognition, extinct states, non sovereign nations, and territories are listed, but their names are not bolded. A state motto is used to describe the intent or motivation of the state in a short phrase. For example, it can be included on a country's flag, coat of arms, or currency. Some countries choose not to have a national motto. == A == Afghanistan: لا إله إلا الله، محمد رسول الله (Lā ʾilāha ʾillāl–lāh, Muhammadun rasūl allāh) There is no god but God; Muhammad is the...
Quite an interesting read, actually.
You can see who used to own whom.
People will fight for independence, but a hundred years later still obey the orders their masters gave them when they were enslaved.
They will print them on every flag and banknote and t-shirt and wear them with pride.
 
Færd
Færd
10:09 PM
@Cerberus So my incomplete understanding is that after toppling Saddam, the US tried to restructure the Iraqi population and power system based on crude divisions: Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds. Through that, they wedged chasms between these sectors that didn't exist before, or widened pre-existing ones, giving rise to lots of bad blood.
And then Iran exploited that and the power vacuum ensuing the de-Bathification of Iraq to its own benefit. So, in a sense and to some extent, the US went to war, and Iran won it.
But Iraq's uprisings in the recent past showed that many were fed up with these divisions and called for a unified nation. They also harbored resentments against Iran's presence in Iraq (eg they torched Iran's embassy in Najaf). These uprisings were brutally oppressed, some say under the direction of Iran, or Soleimani himself. Many were killed.
So there could be a progress towards independence that is blocked partly by the US and partly by Iran. Would Daesh resurge if all foreign powers left? Maybe. Maybe not. I don't know. But this could certainly be wielded as an excuse for those foreign powers to remain indefinitely in Iraq and hamper popular development towards independence. So I'm very doubtful about this excuse.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
@RegDwigнt You celebrity!
Concert Lorrain, hey?
Couldn't identify you in the photo.
@Færd I think your analysis is probably mostly correct.
One remark: I suspect the thing that Iraqi's hated most about their government was perhaps less the division than corruption.
Current protesters inveigh against the whole system, which includes the ethnic division and the corruption.
 
tchrist
tchrist
10:57 PM
@Cerberus You missed the meta-context, which was that my message was in notional response to the one immediately preceding it in the log.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
@tchrist What log? And why notional?
 
tchrist
tchrist
The evil that Trump did is going to get himself hurt.
But only for State concepts of self.
Bolton was for it, of course.
There's nobody left to tell him no. So he sprang for the foulest possible response and nobody could stop him.
There's a NYTimes story about all that.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
@tchrist I suspect Trump doesn't know, doesn't care.
@tchrist Bolton was removed from the centre of power, wasn't he?
Shouldn't we rather be looking at Pompeo?
 
tchrist
tchrist
@Cerberus yes
I read that the military gave him a range of options so that he'd pick one that was less awful. But he did not.
It was to make the ones they wanted him to pick seem not so bad.
By giving one that was heinous.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
11:16 PM
@Færd > Er komt dus zo goed als zeker een Iraanse vergeldingsactie, die zich qua impact enigszins kan meten met de liquidatie door de VS van generaal Soleimani afgelopen vrijdag in Bagdad. Tegelijk zal Iran een heuse oorlog met de VS willen vermijden. Het weet overigens dat ook president Trump daar niet op uit is.
This is what the Dutch press say.
 
tchrist
tchrist
> They didn’t think he would take it. In the wars waged since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Pentagon officials have often offered improbable options to presidents to make other possibilities appear more palatable.
Meanwhile, Bolton has "volunteered" to testify under subpoena in the Senate trial.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
"There is sure to be an Iranian counter-action, which will be equal in impact to the liquidation of general Soleimani by America of last Friday in Baghdad. At the same time, Iran will want to avoid an actual war with America. It knows, by the way, that president Trump is not looking for am actual war either."
@tchrist Right.
@Færd I think Tchrist's article confirms what we have been saying.
The people below Trump didn't want this.
 
Mitch
Mitch
11:42 PM
@Færd 1) If we are talking about mourning by the populace, there was no outpouring of public grief = people in the streets. When Kennedy was shot, yes, there were people in the street.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
> The military adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader said Sunday that Tehran's response to the killing by the United States of its most most influential general will "for sure be military."
In an exclusive interview with CNN in Tehran, the adviser -- Maj. Gen. Hossein Dehghan -- made the most specific and direct threat yet by a senior Iranian official following the killing of Gen. Qasem Soleimani in a US drone strike in Baghdad.
Dehghan said Iran would retaliate directly against US "military sites."
 
Mitch
Mitch
2) if we're talking about the press coverage, every head of state death gets positive obituaries. Nixon obituary was subdued because he resigned in disgrace. Reagan on the other hand did nothing awful within the US and was considered a great man for being there when the Soviet Union fell apart.
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
> within the US
 
Mitch
Mitch
I have all sorts of negative to say about Reagan, but why do you think he was falsely eulogized? (from your point of view)
(actually I feel like there was a recent American politician who got decidedly negative press on his legacy when he died...can't remember who though... I remember people (the press) talking about how it was strange... you usually let some time pass before bashing a dead guy)
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
He and Thatcher made Neoliberalism big?
And no doubt he ordered wars around the world, though I don't know which (it was before my time).
 

« first day (3343 days earlier)      last day (1585 days later) »