A Political Thread pt. 2

[AlRums]

Trump strikes back with retaliatory measures against Colombia for rejecting deportation flights

President Donald Trump has imposed strict consequences for Colombia after it refused to accept deportation flights from the U.S.

www.foxnews.com

https://us.cnn.com/2025/01/26/politics/colombia-tariffs-trump-deportation-flights/index.html

Trump's starting his first war, albeit economic.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Interesting figures and why when people go off about not integrating its important whilst some may have valid viewpoints it's important to challenge why they hold those viewpoints.

Because this is unconscious bias/racism and we shouldn't ignore it exists. I'll admit to 24-48 hours ago I had held the wrong impression because I'd not read the facts of the case.

YouGov (@yougov.co.uk)

21-24% of Britons falsely believe that Axel Rudakubana is a Muslim, an immigrant to the UK, and was motivated by religious terrorism – and this figure has grown since the summer https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/51471-who-do-britons-hold-responsible-for-the-southport-attack

bsky.app

i was in another discussion group talking about DEI and i was trying to explain my believe SOME level of visible action to offset any unconscious bias important...and this group of generally right leaning (i'll be generous and say the kind of right that comes with age)....pretty universally denied unconscious bias as an idea......and just ignored it when i suggested that means everything we see is CONSIOUS!....which is so much worse in my mind...we're ******

 

[Amiga500]

So, your Denmark.

What do you do?
NATO Article 5:

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary.

For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack: I. on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer; 2. on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.'

Articles 5 and 6 make no provision for one NATO member attacking another. But at the same time, it does not absolve the other members of their responsibilities of aiding the attacked party.

Clearly if the USA actually did attack/invade Greenland, it should be kicked straight out of NATO - and you'd imagine, every base on European soil [and even others under member's jurisdiction - e.g. Diego Garcia].

Getting into the rather fantastical scenarios of actual war:
Direct military intervention is unlikely as collectively the European nations fall far short of the USA's force projection capabilities.
Perhaps sea denial is a plausible option as long as the RN and MN are willing to commit their Astutes and Suffrens.

But at that point, it really has all gone mental.

 

[Which Tyler]

Wrong age demographic?

I mainly of i log in get **** about video games. All hate fueled crap.

I'm getting more political stuff, but it seems the same political stuff as I was always being fed - just more of it.
Maybe I'm just "lucky"

I'm 48 - so probably too old for anything incel, but certainly an age that I'd expect an algorithm to assume I was moving rightwards

 

[Kiwiwomble]

ive completely missed this...why does Trump want to buy Greenland?...i'm assuming natural resources he wants to mine?

 

[Which Tyler]

ive completely missed this...why does Trump want to buy Greenland?...i'm assuming natural resources he wants to mine?

Yup, both those in Greenland, and those under the arctic ice; with a side-desire of preventing "bad people" crossing the arctic sea and invading USA.

Probably water as well (though that's a natural resource, I guess)

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Yup, both those in Greenland, and those under the arctic ice; with a side-desire of preventing "bad people" crossing the arctic sea and invading USA.

Probably water as well (though that's a natural resource, I guess)

its hard to be sure sometimes if its one of his mad ideas thats dont seem to have a purpose like renaming half the gulf of mexico...some something more serious

 

[ncurd]

i was in another discussion group talking about DEI and i was trying to explain my believe SOME level of visible action to offset any unconscious bias important...and this group of generally right leaning (i'll be generous and say the kind of right that comes with age)....pretty universally denied unconscious bias as an idea......and just ignored it when i suggested that means everything we see is CONSIOUS!....which is so much worse in my mind...we're ******

It was really interesting at work shortly after George Floyd we all got mandatory Unconious Bias training. Most of my colleagues are of center persuasion and if center right anti Brexit (apart from one).

It had a thought exercise at the beginning which was real good at showing you if you think of person of a few traits how you automatically genderise them or give them ethnicity even though it wasn't mentioned.

Everyone who took the training seriously said it was useful and pointed out stuff they were kinda aware of but not how prevalent it was. How much they've used it since to confront thier biases who knows. We have a pretty diverse workforce so that's a good sign if male centric (issue in industry you can't hire people who don't exist).

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

It was really interesting at work shortly after George Floyd we all got mandatory Unconious Bias training. Most of my colleagues are of center persuasion and if center right anti Brexit (apart from one).

It had a thought exercise at the beginning which was real good at showing you if you think of person of a few traits how you automatically genderise them or give them ethnicity even though it wasn't mentioned.

Everyone who took the training seriously said it was useful and pointed out stuff they were kinda aware of but not how prevalent it was. How much they've used it since to confront thier biases who knows. We have a pretty diverse workforce so that's a good sign if male centric (issue in industry you can't hire people who don't exist).

One that sticks in my mind is a "riddle": A father and his son are in a car accident. The father dies at the scene and the son is rushed to the hospital. At the hospital the surgeon looks at the boy and says "I can't operate on this boy, he is my son."

The answer is that the surgeon is his mother but it really highlighted the unconscious bias in that many people didn't even consider that the mother could be the surgeon and that the surgeon must be male.

Another interesting one is they sent out a bunch of CV's with identical information and simply swapped the name between a suitably white name like John Smith and an African sounding name. The one with the African name got something like 1/4 of the responses despite being identical to the one with the white name.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

It was really interesting at work shortly after George Floyd we all got mandatory Unconious Bias training. Most of my colleagues are of center persuasion and if center right anti Brexit (apart from one).

It had a thought exercise at the beginning which was real good at showing you if you think of person of a few traits how you automatically genderise them or give them ethnicity even though it wasn't mentioned.

Everyone who took the training seriously said it was useful and pointed out stuff they were kinda aware of but not how prevalent it was. How much they've used it since to confront thier biases who knows. We have a pretty diverse workforce so that's a good sign if male centric (issue in industry you can't hire people who don't exist).

i felt like i was being gaslit....because my experience was the idea was pretty universally accepted

 

[AlRums]

One that sticks in my mind is a "riddle": A father and his son are in a car accident. The father dies at the scene and the son is rushed to the hospital. At the hospital the surgeon looks at the boy and says "I can't operate on this boy, he is my son."

The answer is that the surgeon is his mother but it really highlighted the unconscious bias in that many people didn't even consider that the mother could be the surgeon and that the surgeon must be male.

Another interesting one is they sent out a bunch of CV's with identical information and simply swapped the name between a suitably white name like John Smith and an African sounding name. The one with the African name got something like 1/4 of the responses despite being identical to the one with the white name.

I've read that story, about CVS as well. It was on CNN

 

[AlRums]

It was really interesting at work shortly after George Floyd we all got mandatory Unconious Bias training. Most of my colleagues are of center persuasion and if center right anti Brexit (apart from one).

It had a thought exercise at the beginning which was real good at showing you if you think of person of a few traits how you automatically genderise them or give them ethnicity even though it wasn't mentioned.

Everyone who took the training seriously said it was useful and pointed out stuff they were kinda aware of but not how prevalent it was. How much they've used it since to confront thier biases who knows. We have a pretty diverse workforce so that's a good sign if male centric (issue in industry you can't hire people who don't exist).

What about those people who didn't take it seriously?

 

[McTallshort]

ive completely missed this...why does Trump want to buy Greenland?...i'm assuming natural resources he wants to mine?

Greenland has been strategically important since the days of Nelson but even more now with the ice caps retreating. It allows access to the North West passage all year. You also have China building stuff like airports there which has worried a few people but to "take it" as Trump says is absolutely no different to Putin wanting to take Ukraine apart from Trump will be attacking an ally in Denmark who given they control everything coming out of the Baltic ocean is a very important one and makes little sense to attack.

 

[ncurd]

What about those people who didn't take it seriously?

Unsure we get a lot of corporate mandated training. I wouldn't judge anyone going through the motions on it.