The Trump Presidency

[mocat]

i'm not saying we have to blame trump directly. my comment was in response to 'stone saying "it all worked out"

[MakeItRain]

If you think your neighbor is going to attack you and you end up accidentally shooting the mail man, do you blame that on your neighbor? No, have control of your weapons.

I think you're being sarcastic, but for those willing to dismiss the cause and effect of the the action on Soleimani, it's important to note that it wasn't a launched missile that took this plane down but it was the missile defense system designed to disable incoming missiles.

[Dugout DickStone]

If you think your neighbor is going to attack you and you end up accidentally shooting the mail man, do you blame that on your neighbor? No, have control of your weapons.

I think you're being sarcastic, but for those willing to dismiss the cause and effect of the the action on Soleimani, it's important to note that it wasn't a launched missile that took this plane down but it was the missile defense system designed to disable incoming missiles.

That is a real piece of s missile defense system.

I will blame trump for a lot of things but this is not one. 

[chum1]

It can both be the case that Iran didn't intend to shoot down that plane and also that the killing of Soleimani was part of a chain of events that led to the plane getting shot down. If Soleimani's killing played no causal role, it's a pretty rough ridin' big coincidence.

[sys]

meh.  It seems to have worked out

except for all the civilians on that plane

and allies that don't trust us (even more), and destroying the last vestiges of the nuclear deal, and the impending revenge by proxy.

[sys]

would the plane have been shot down if trump hadn't droned Soleimani?

no.

[Dugout DickStone]

So you are saying this system didn't exist until then?

[Spracne]

I'm with Stone on this one. When but-for causation becomes too attenuated, it is insufficient for assigning blame. Whatever you think about the assassination of Solemanei, a rational decision maker wouldn't treat the remote possibility of Iran accidentally shooting down a passenger jet several links down the causal chain as determinative in arriving at the decision to act (or not act).

[Dugout DickStone]

I'm with Stone on this one. When but-for causation becomes too attenuated, it is insufficient for assigning blame. Whatever you think about the assassination of Solemanei, a rational decision maker wouldn't treat the remote possibility of Iran accidentally shooting down a passenger jet several links down the causal chain as determinative in arriving at the decision to act (or not act).

Proximate cause and all that

[Spracne]

I'm with Stone on this one. When but-for causation becomes too attenuated, it is insufficient for assigning blame. Whatever you think about the assassination of Solemanei, a rational decision maker wouldn't treat the remote possibility of Iran accidentally shooting down a passenger jet several links down the causal chain as determinative in arriving at the decision to act (or not act).

Proximate cause and all that

Exactly. I didn't want to drop the legalism, though.

[Cire]

They missiled the base and then went on full alert in case of response by USA.

They didn't communicate their readiness to the civilians and the airline was cleared, picked up by the SAM system and shot down.

[Spracne]

It's pretty weak they won't just fess up. The fact that Iran has not once blamed America for shooting it down (remember, 0 Americans on board) tells you everything you need to know.

[chum1]

We're not trying a case here, so I'm not sure to what extent proximate cause applies.

Whether or not Trump should have been trying to kill Soleimani might also be relevant. Suppose a kid doing something causes a chain of events that leads to an accident. Are things different with regard to the accident if what the kid was doing was something he wasn't supposed to be doing? It seems so! In that case, a lot of people would be like, "LOOK WHAT YOU DID!"

[Spracne]

We're not trying a case here, so I'm not sure to what extent proximate cause applies.

Whether or not Trump should have been trying to kill Soleimani might also be relevant. Suppose a kid doing something causes a chain of events that leads to an accident. Are things different with regard to the accident if what the kid was doing was something he wasn't supposed to be doing? It seems so! In that case, a lot of people would be like, "LOOK WHAT YOU DID!"

Of course that's relevant. Even accepting for the sake of argument that Trump acted wrongly, was the remote possibility that Iran might accidentally shoot down a passenger jet after their retaliatory strike among the array of reasonably foreseeable risks that made Trump's action wrong in the first place?

[chum1]

We're not trying a case here, so I'm not sure to what extent proximate cause applies.

Whether or not Trump should have been trying to kill Soleimani might also be relevant. Suppose a kid doing something causes a chain of events that leads to an accident. Are things different with regard to the accident if what the kid was doing was something he wasn't supposed to be doing? It seems so! In that case, a lot of people would be like, "LOOK WHAT YOU DID!"

Of course that's relevant. Even accepting for the sake of argument that Trump acted wrongly, was the remote possibility that Iran might accidentally shoot down a passenger jet after their retaliatory strike among the array of reasonably foreseeable risks that made Trump's action wrong in the first place?

If you had only been at work this afternoon instead of at a hotel rough ridin' your mistress, you wouldn't have missed the call from the cable company. If you hadn't missed the call from the cable company, they wouldn't have come to the house to shut off the cable. If they hadn't come to the house to shut off the cable, they wouldn't have left the gate open. If they hadn't left the gate open, the dog wouldn't have gotten out. If the dog hadn't gotten out, it wouldn't have been hit by a car. YOU KILLED THE rough ridin' DOG, YOU bad person!!!

[MakeItRain]

So you are saying this system didn't exist until then?

It's pretty clear that this particular SAM battery wasn't active until Monday night, otherwise every plane in that path, right outside of the busiest airport in the county, would have been shot down.

[MakeItRain]

I'm with Stone on this one. When but-for causation becomes too attenuated, it is insufficient for assigning blame. Whatever you think about the assassination of Solemanei, a rational decision maker wouldn't treat the remote possibility of Iran accidentally shooting down a passenger jet several links down the causal chain as determinative in arriving at the decision to act (or not act).

This legalese word salad isn't distracting from the fact that the premise of this post is misleading as technically they didn't "shoot down" a passenger jet.

[Spracne]

I'm with Stone on this one. When but-for causation becomes too attenuated, it is insufficient for assigning blame. Whatever you think about the assassination of Solemanei, a rational decision maker wouldn't treat the remote possibility of Iran accidentally shooting down a passenger jet several links down the causal chain as determinative in arriving at the decision to act (or not act).

This legalese word salad isn't distracting from the fact that the premise of this post is misleading as technically they didn't "shoot down" a passenger jet.

 

[MakeItRain]

I'm with Stone on this one. When but-for causation becomes too attenuated, it is insufficient for assigning blame. Whatever you think about the assassination of Solemanei, a rational decision maker wouldn't treat the remote possibility of Iran accidentally shooting down a passenger jet several links down the causal chain as determinative in arriving at the decision to act (or not act).

This legalese word salad isn't distracting from the fact that the premise of this post is misleading as technically they didn't "shoot down" a passenger jet.

 

What are you rolling your eyes for, that undercuts your entire argument which is essentially no one forced them to push a button to launch a missile, that didn't happen. They were attempting to guard themselves from being hit by a missile which seems rational given the seemingly unprovoked attack on Soleimani.

[MakeItRain]

Also stop being such a bitch and have a grown up conversation. What has happened to you?

[catastrophe]

If you think your neighbor is going to attack you and you end up accidentally shooting the mail man, do you blame that on your neighbor? No, have control of your weapons.

It’s not about assigning blame. There are obviously more blameworthy actors here. We shouldn’t be blaming Bush or Obama whenever ISIS kills another civilian either, but it’s a constant reminder that these kinds of decisions come with collateral damage.

[MakeItRain]

So you are saying this system didn't exist until then?

It's pretty clear that this particular SAM battery wasn't active until Monday night, otherwise every plane in that path, right outside of the busiest airport in the county, would have been shot down.

I don't know exactly how these weapons operate, are they fully automated, is there a human decision once an aircraft is identified? Either way the consequences for their use should be understood. Just as escalating tensions through killing a military leader.

They aren't designed to take down aircraft, they're designed to take down multiple missiles. They have to be activated, after that it's an automated process. Essentially there's a radar, when a body is registered on that radar the missiles are deployed. They aren't designed have two missiles colliding but the SAM missile detonates near the incoming missiles, in this case an outgoing aircraft, and deploys shrapnel that in theory explodes the incoming missile(s) in the air. People could tell it was SAM defense that took the plane down right away, well at least before Iran cleared the wreckage, because the shrapnel dimples were very evident on the parts of the fuselage that didn't burn. You could literally see it on the news reports that day.

[mocat]

Yeah the first photo I saw was of the tail and there was a freaking hole in it

[sys]

It’s not about assigning blame. There are obviously more blameworthy actors here. We shouldn’t be blaming Bush or Obama whenever ISIS kills another civilian either, but it’s a constant reminder that these kinds of decisions come with collateral damage.

mostly sums it up, but lacks the part about one party tearing up a treaty on contrived pretenses and assassinating a govt official of the other party.

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1215661864975077376

[steve dave]

https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1216054398138376192


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk