First, it’s ‘Universal Postal Union’. Second, if you want to push back on claims that it’s outdated and need of revisiting, it’s not exactly a stinging rebuttal to point out that it’s been there since 1873.
No in fact it is l’Union postale universelle, as its legal name, and the operating langauge is the French language.
But of course the rational response to a problem of the rates imbalances emerging from the e-commerce era is not to engage in adjustment dialogues, but to leave a coordinating mechanism more than 100 years old in track record which literally every country with the operating postal service is a member… very rational this type of decision.
shrug universelle and internationale are distinct words in French. Kudos for correcting your own mistranslation. I’m most comfortable in English but if you feel like your point is better made in French then by all means let’s hear that.
shrug “We’ve always done it this way” is not an argument. Next.
It isn’t a right thing.
And I would be very curious to know why leaving the postal union was the right thing to do too.
Are you likewise curious about reasons to stay in it? What’s your position?
I will concede that the Russians gain credibility by propping up Assad. They can go to other dictators and say “Look, this is a sign that we’re reliable. Join our team and we’ll make sure you stay in power too.”
But should America try the same thing? Do we really want to put a Syrian Diem in power and then commit American resources to keeping him in power? I think the United States should be seeking international credibility in other more positive ways.
If this was about helping establish a legitimate stable democracy, I’d say we should go for it. If this was even about supporting a dictator who had been an American ally, I might accept that we owed the guy. But I don’t see how propping up Assad or replacing him with a different but equivalent dictator is a cause worth American troops fighting for.
Forums poster XT: manages to write like a novella’s worth of rambling about Syria while freely admitting he doesn’t even know or care to know what Turkey’s position is.
My man have you heard of Enlightened Centrism? It’s all the rage.
I’m concerned that I seem to be the only one that can see what Trump is up to here. I’m scared this means that my mind has adapted to his, since it seems so obvious, but nobody else sees it.
He wants ALL the pushback on this that ALL the critics and pundits of the media, MIC, and politicians can muster. He will then simply designate them ALL as members of the “Deep State” behind it ALL (non-Syria related) and will call for them ALL to be considered enemies of the state/purged.
Mark my words. And sorry, no, this is not a doomsaying asahi parody. The difference is that I don’t think Trump can pull it off. I’m only making the prediction for both bragging rights and so we can all PALATR while he fumbles around trying to figure out how to get the purges going.
I also meant to mention that this is also the pre-retconning of his presidential legacy. It’s a big decision he can make unilaterally, it has automatic popular support, and he can always point back to it as being “correct” without anybody being able to prove otherwise.
He will claim to have been pushed out by all the evil people who only came after him because he cut off their Syria spiggot.
AFAICT it would be fairly counterproductive and disruptive for the US actually to leave the UPU. But it may be a useful negotiating tactic for the US to threaten to leave the UPU, as this article suggests.
The idea that it’s a good idea to do something Russia wants us to do while dealing with Russia having hijacked our elections is moronic. If there is an argument for pulling out, that argument can be had only after Russia is properly punished, so that we aren’t just doing Russia’s bidding.
And there is basically no chance that Trump isn’t pulling out because Putin told him he needs to. There’s no chance this wasn’t one of the things Putin wanted if he got Trump elected.
So instead of criticizing, why don’t you explain to us the Turkish government’s position and why Americans should give two shits about it.
Look you got your Jerusalem embassy. Now you got Mother Russia next door. Every silver lining had a cloud, and the Motherland has a lot of clouds.
If the problem with it that it’s in need of revisiting, then perhaps the stinging rebuttal is along the lines of “it’s more in our interests to have a voice in whatever emerges from such a revisiting than to not.”
Kinda like the Brexit argument, elsewhere in this forum.
ETA: Actually, the thing that worries me is that Himself might be withdrawing from the union as a prelude to abandoning the national postal service.
I kept on warning people last year not to get to excited about the embassy move. Sure, it was a nice gesture, but that’s all it was - a gesture. I told them that if Trump were really on our side, he’d be working to get Russia and Iran out of Syria.
I hate being right sometimes.
I dunno. Its seems to me that, almost across the board, people who are being there and doing that agree that this pullout is bad idea. But what do they know? They probably don’t even read the SDMB. Oh, and I agree with senoy regarding screwing the Kurds over. Bad, bad, bad.
I’m extremely skeptical that the good outweighs the bad with US troops on the ground in the Middle East in all but the narrowest of circumstances (very clear mission, supported by regional partners, with a very clear path to victory and exit). Thus I think getting them out is probably better than leaving them there. Shitty circumstances all around.
A counterpoint might be that a strong Russia can help serve as a check on China. So Syria right now is in Russia’s camp and by extension Iran. That means they aren’t in China’s pocket. Is that good or bad? I don’t know, but it’s something to at least ponder.
Well as a Pakistani I can tell you having a Superpower and your regional rival having a major presence in a war torn neighbour who had irredentist claims on your territory is just.the.greatest.thing.
Maybe you guys are willing to trade neighbours?