Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Brussels

I think the major difference is that there is value to normalized relations with an aspiring super power and one of our largest trading partners for one and another would be that we don't have the leverage with China to push more aggressively for reforms before normalizing relations like we do with Cuba or used to with Iran.


Oh, so we can't bully China like we could Cuba. And China didn't become our largest trading partner overnight, there was ample time to limit trade with them while demanding they improve things, but that would mean derailing the money train that was coming. If Cuba had any significant economical or strategical value at all the photo would be a non-issue.

Understand that I really don't have a problem with a photo pf Bush in Tienanmen Square under a portrait of Mao, or Reagan standing under a bust of Lenin and the hammer and sickle of the USSR, and certainly no issue with Obama posing for a photo in Cuba with a graffiti image of Che Guevara spray painted on a building. And nobody else should either, unless they have the same issue with all 3.
 
Understand that I really don't have a problem with a photo pf Bush in Tienanmen Square under a portrait of Mao, or Reagan standing under a bust of Lenin and the hammer and sickle of the USSR, and certainly no issue with Obama posing for a photo in Cuba with a graffiti image of Che Guevara spray painted on a building. And nobody else should either, unless they have the same issue with all 3.

Ding! Ding! We have a winner.
 
Last edited:
Oh, so we can't bully China like we could Cuba. And China didn't become our largest trading partner overnight, there was ample time to limit trade with them while demanding they improve things, but that would mean derailing the money train that was coming. If Cuba had any significant economical or strategical value at all the photo would be a non-issue.

Understand that I really don't have a problem with a photo pf Bush in Tienanmen Square under a portrait of Mao, or Reagan standing under a bust of Lenin and the hammer and sickle of the USSR, and certainly no issue with Obama posing for a photo in Cuba with a graffiti image of Che Guevara spray painted on a building. And nobody else should either, unless they have the same issue with all 3.

ever heard of the Cuban missile crisis. pretty sure there is some strategic value there. but yes, we don't have as much leverage to "bully" or otherwise influence China as we do Cuba and China has significantly greater economic value to us which matters whether you like it or not. they're also stringer militarily, so that's another, very big reason why we have to handle them differently. I know you think we should be nice to everybody and/or just live and let live, but as nice as that sounds it doesn't work like that. and not all countries are the same, so we have to deal with them in different ways.
 
darn, the arbiter of the internet chooses the liberals again on DSF - and gets seconded by Michturd. I guess it's just not my day...

original.gif
 
Understand that I really don't have a problem with a photo pf Bush in Tienanmen Square under a portrait of Mao, or Reagan standing under a bust of Lenin and the hammer and sickle of the USSR, and certainly no issue with Obama posing for a photo in Cuba with a graffiti image of Che Guevara spray painted on a building. And nobody else should either, unless they have the same issue with all 3.

They don't allow political graffiti in Cuba. It's a capital offense.

Couple things I'm a little surprised about....

I'm no expert in Cuban post-Batista history (who, like Tsar Nicholas of Russia, was no fuckin' Mother Theresa, but that's another discussion) and architecture, but it had been my understanding - and apparently mistakenly - that Che had departed Cuba not on the best terms with the Castros - it had been my understanding that even Castro had come to view Che as actually too brutal in governance - and had been rendered to the status of "personae non grata" in Cuba.

My internet search shows this mural to be on the Ministry of the Interior building (dilapidated looking piece of shit that is in need of a makeover by one Donald J. Trump) so I guess Che is held to a degree of esteem in Cuba.

I guess I would have to say that it probably wasn't the best possible photo op for Obama, but - who knows? We've seen two of his Republican predecessors photographed in similar situations; maybe it was just a matter of circumstance like it would have been for the other two.

I voted for Obama once and voted against him twice. I voted for him against Clinton in the California Democratic primary, and I voted for McCain in the general in '08 and I voted for the Libertarian former Governor of New Mexico Gary Whatshisname in '12.

I guess I like and dislike Obama about the same as I did his dumbass predecessor, George W. Bush, whom I also voted against actually three times - I voted for McCain in the Republican primary and I voted Libertarian in the generals in 2000 and 2004.

That said, I think he made the right decision to stick to his plan and go to the baseball game yesterday.

Fuck the terrorists; don't let them win.

Cuba Plaza de la Revolucion

According to the above from Wikipedia, both Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis have held Masses in front of that there mural in that there plaza, so...

What the heck.

My panties ain't in a bunch.

And the baseball game was kind of a cool event; Derek Jeter was there and if he hadn't gone straight to the Yankees, he was would have played shortstop for the University of Michigan Wolverines!!!
 
Last edited:
darn, the arbiter of the internet chooses the liberals again on DSF - and gets seconded by Michturd. I guess it's just not my day...

don't feel sad. maybe one of the other republitard posters will come over later & hold your penis.
 
don't feel sad. maybe one of the other republitard posters will come over later & hold your penis.

I can take solace in the fact that at least Bernie Sanders won't win the Dem nomination - at least the idiots on the left outnumber to really stupid ones...

Don't worry, I'm sure thumb, hungry or dubbs will rub your vagina for you the day the bern realizes he's a loser and bows out of the race.
 
Don't worry, I'm sure thumb, hungry or dubbs will rub your vagina for you the day the bern realizes he's a loser and bows out of the race.

Ha ha...

Back in the ESPN days, we used to have these political discussions on the Michigan sports board.

Hungry is a staunch conservative who works in law enforcement and is adamantly a socially conservative Christian.

Hungry and MichChamp used to battle about RichRod and Michigan football the way you battle with MichChamp about politics and religion.

I would bet the ranch that my friend Hungry did NOT vote for Bernie Sanders.
 
Last edited:
Ha ha...

Back in the ESPN days, we used to have these political discussions on the Michigan sports board.

Hungry is a staunch conservative who works in law enforcement and is adamantly a socially conservative Christian.

Hungry and MichChamp used to battle about RichRod and Michigan football the way you battle with MichChamp about politics and religion.

I would bet the ranch that my friend Hungry did NOT vote for Bernie Sanders.

apologies to hungry - meant sgg but must have been thinking of the argument from the thread re: uofm being on the bubble. I hope hungry was the anti-RR in that one but based on the aforementioned bubble thread, I can't be too confident either way.
 
Did your source of a friend who knows a poster's cousin on the DSF give you permission to post that response?
 
Last edited:
apologies to hungry - meant sgg but must have been thinking of the argument from the thread re: uofm being on the bubble. I hope hungry was the anti-RR in that one but based on the aforementioned bubble thread, I can't be too confident either way.

MichChamp was anti-RR. Hungry was not so much pro rRR but was adamantly against people being so anti-RR, if that makes any kind of sense.

I didn't like the hire that much myself but as a legatee Son of Ann Arbor (the whore) and Michigan alum I'm about as unapologetically Michigan loyal as can be so I kind of kept a lid on my displeasure.

I would have been more unhappy about the end of the winning season the streak but that season I missed the Illinois loss because I flew to ATL that day to attend the funeral of my best friend's dad, who had been faculty at Michigan when I was growing up.

My best friend also had the hots for Claire Canham in high school-pretty much everybody did.

So it made my perspective more zen.
 
Last edited:
That's pretty fucked up but an interesting read. Thanks for the story.

You're welcome and it's not surprising. Same shit happened with Stalin and Trotsky; at a point in time, one of 'em had to go.

There can really only be one to totalitarian despot at a time; more than one takes away from the whole concept of "totalitarian despot."
 
MichChamp was anti-RR. Hungry was not so much pro rRR but was adamantly against people being so anti-RR, if that makes any kind of sense.

I didn't like the hire that much myself but as a legatee Son of Ann Arbor (the whore) and Michigan alum I'm about as unapologetically Michigan loyal as can be so I kind of kept a lid on my displeasure.

I would have been more unhappy about the end of the winning season the streak but that season I missed the Illinois loss because I flew to ATL that day to attend the funeral of my best friend's dad, who had been faculty at Michigan when I was growing up.

My best friend also had the hots for Claire Canham in high school-pretty much everybody did.

So it made my perspective more zen.

well, I think the bright line between RichRod defenders & Michigan fans that merely tried to stay neutral was that the former were willing to trash Lloyd Carr and throw him under the bus to defend RR.

these were the same people that said for years "anybody can win 10 games a year at Michigan" then when Bill Martin followed their advice and hired outside the program, and we promptly LOST nine games in a season, scrambled all over to find excuses for what went wrong.

if i recall correctly, hungry was a member of this group, though he wasnt the most extreme.

i didnt just have these arguments online... i had a couple (dumb) friends who actually stopped talking to me for periods of time. I really rubbed it in too when he was fired.
 
well, I think the bright line between RichRod defenders & Michigan fans that merely tried to stay neutral was that the former were willing to trash Lloyd Carr and throw him under the bus to defend RR.

these were the same people that said for years "anybody can win 10 games a year at Michigan" then when Bill Martin followed their advice and hired outside the program, and we promptly LOST nine games in a season, scrambled all over to find excuses for what went wrong.

Well a lot of Michigan fans were throwing Lloyd Carr under the bus even when he was still the coach.

I was a big fan of Carr and I still am.

Not that I thought he was perfect, but who is?


In retrospect I guess I've come to believe that if he really had wanted to retire after 2006, it probably would've been better that he had.
 
Back
Top