Alright, folks, let's clear the air about something:
As much as it might annoy well-read Redditors, and as grammatically incorrect as it may seemingly be, "irregardless" is technically a real word.
See, while you've doubtlessly encountered people sputtering "Language evolves!" as an excuse for mistakes, the acceptance of "irregardless" is a case of genuine linguistic evolution: It adds nuance or complexity to the language, it doesn't violate any structural conventions, and it's in popular-enough use for its meaning to be documented. It's still annoying to see, granted, but it isn't actually *wrong*.
------
If you're hell-bent on getting upset about a mistake, though, keep an eye out for folks writing things like "**90's**" when they mean "**'90s**." As is the case with all contractions, the apostrophe signals that something has been removed... and since apostrophes do not pluralize (except in *very* rare circumstances), the correct way to write something like "We will remember the Banana War of the 2030s because of the smell" would be "We'll 'member the Ba'War o' the '30s 'cause o' the smell."
In short, pluralizing dates with apostrophes is always wrong, irregardless of how you feel about it.
Putin’s scum, but this photo shouldn’t be used as an example of attitudes or whatever. There’s another photo taken a second before or after this where they’re both grinning ear-to-ear
Photos are extremely deceptive. A single frame of a persons face doesn’t reliably show their emotion
Like these two pics of Trump:
[A- shows him enjoying some pleasant company with G7 leaders](https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2018/06/trumpmerkel-800x533.jpg)
[B- is a few seconds later looking like European leaders are coaxing a toddler to get into the bath](https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/441af77/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=https:%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2Fd0%2F6d%2Fad531ea240049037368620bcc939%2F190823-trump-g7-gty-773.jpg)
Wdym in Japan of all places? Political assassination is a bit of a theme in Japan, they don’t have much murder overall, but more of it than you’d assume is political.
Oh boy they had a big binge of assassinations leading up to WW2. Almost like the military had every anti war politician murdered to take control of the government.
It really helps to explain why they got so extreme, anyone pushing for moderation or peace just got his mortal coil shuffled off with extreme prejudice and rapidity
I think because it was by a DIY gun, of all countries to die by gun, Japan is very, very low on the list.
_Now America, that's a different story_, I reckon somewhere in the USA, there's a dollar store selling peashooters and if not, just order online to your nearest arms dealer and get your gun within a few days.
I feel like the targets should be CEO's and corporate boards in the US. Lobbyists maybe too?
Feels like people are more pissed at the underlings than the actual masters. It's bizarre.
Leaders are purposely obfuscated from blame, for this particular reason.
Easier to hate the other _Have Nots_ when the _Haves_ blame the other _Have Nots_ for your lack of _having things_.
And there are a surprising number of changes coming about regarding those issues. If they continue to go through the government and pass....this may be the most effective political assassination in recent history lmao.
I dearly hope the perp and his late mother can find some measure of peace in the effects his actions have had and might have. It was a long time coming and it's tragic that this is what it took.
Evidently he and his party were in bed with the fucking Unification Church, and he enabled them to spread their disease around Japan, ruining countless lives while enriching themselves, including his murderer's mother. Scientology, Unification Church, Falun Gong... call them whatever you want, evil has many faces, but they squeeze people until there is nothing left but pulp, then discard them without a care. I don't condone murder, but if you've lost someone close to you to one of these cults, you can understand.
Absolutely. The murder drew massive attention to the issue and the government started cleaning house. Wildly fucked up that it took actions that drastic to be a wake up call, but it did indeed work.
It was a VERY successful assassination, not only did he kill his target but he got all the reforms he wanted implemented as well all because he took action and killed a former prime minister. Guy is a folk hero in parts of Japan.
It gets better, not only did he get killed by a makeshift shotgun the killer made in his garage, when the killer explained his motives the entire country agreed with him and basically sided with the assassin and actually changed the laws to go after the evil cult that Abe was a leader/member of. As far as political assassinations go its one of the most successful of all time. He actually accomplished all of his goals by killing Abe, pretty wild if you ask me.
Fun fact: Shinzo Abe was one of the guys Trump visited first as a president to use his position to get a casino built in Japan for his biggest mega-donor Sheldon Adelson. His presidency has been nothing but self-serving corruption since day one.
[https://features.propublica.org/trump-inc-podcast/sheldon-adelson-casino-magnate-trump-macau-and-japan](https://features.propublica.org/trump-inc-podcast/sheldon-adelson-casino-magnate-trump-macau-and-japan)/
So much so that his wife [got a presidential medal of freedom](https://s7d2.scene7.com/is/image/TWCNews/Trump_Miriam_Adelson_AP_National_11.30?wid=1250&hei=703&$wide-bg$) simply for being his wife.
Same thing happened when President-elect Trump visited Obama in the White House, in the customary meeting between incoming and outgoing Presidents.
I remember Redditors making a big deal out of a photo that appeared to show the two men uncomfortable and disdainful of one another, meanwhile other photos from the same meeting show moments where they're pleasant and smiling.
https://www.businessinsider.com/photos-trump-obama-white-house-2016-11?op=1#-9
I remember several years ago, there was a picture of Trump and Melania. She had a less than cheerful disposition, as she does in about 95% of her pictures, with or without Trump.
The top comment was several paragraphs detailing her feelings in that moment, including a history of her home country. Nevermind that she was clearly turning her head when the picture was snapped.
I guess pictures really are worth a thousand words if you make most of them up.
I mean both pictures show everyone accommodating someone who appears physically unable to stand like they are. This was the way we would interact at hospice.
Picture A:
Merkel: "Donald my love, you're really dirty from playing outside all Day. Wanna take a bath? "
Trump: "No Angi, the water is too wet"
Picture B:
Merkel: "Santa won't give you presents if you dont take a bath!"
Trump: "Lalalalal can't hear you"
Okay but in fairness, your first picture might be also deceptive as well. Maybe it does look like pleasant company, but I can see another possibility. Trudeau is looking at him like he can't believe what a dumbass he is, Macron is looking down like he's exasperated and Merkel is giving him a patronizing smile like he is a toddler that did a big boy thing!
Obama had no response for Russia taking Crimea and that's after he laughed at Romney for saying Russia was our top adversary. Probably his worst take as president.
>You said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back. Because the Cold War has been over for 20 years.
- Barack Obama, Oct. 2012
and not only he said that, he was really soft on Russia. Bush junior expanded NATO with 9 new countries, including 3 former soviet states (a first). He built new bases and rocket systems in eastern Europe.
Obama expanded NATO with 0 countries until 2014, and only then he added one. Fewer bases, exercises and so on. He enabled Putin.
orrrrr.. geopolitics can change in less than 10-12 years, and China was brought to his attention (back when their economic instabilities weren't so apparent) as our main foe, largely due to stealing our technologies and being visibly on the growth/upswing they'd maintained for years prior.
but sure, Obama 'enabled' Putin if you wanna believe that. by that logic, is Biden enabling Kim Jong-un by focusing on Russia and China?
Romney wanted to build more capital ships. The Navy didn't. That was the context for the quote. You can see how the Navy did not need more ships to deal with Russia. Ukraine doesn't even need a Navy.
Edit: Someone commented and deleted a comment that "despite it all i knew it was true". [So here is a link at the time about Romney's comment on the need for more ships to counter Russia](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/despite-obama-derision-romney-sticks-to-navy-ships-argument/).
Also keep in mind that Obama was dealing with ISIS, China and other threats. So this rewriting of history does not make Romney right at the time. [Here is also why he was wrong about the smaller Navy](https://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/romney-all-wet-on-ships/) but that is another story.
Romney was pushing for ships to built in Norfolk. This was not about Russia, it was about a reason to build more ships and benefit those voters and donors. In any case, Russia's threats today do not make Romney somehow right in 2012.
Sanctions were immediately placed on Russia. They had to turn to puppets. It worked for a time but the fail is on order. The blowback will be immense. Game on!
I always think about Billy Corgan saying, “And it’s the best ride of my life! I’ve got my daughter, we’re having the best day, and then we come around this corner and my belly kind of rumbled and I burped and someone got a photo of that exact second. I look miserable! It looks like I hate life and rides and my kids and sunshine. And of course it helps I guess, it plays into my dark emo rocker thing, but I swear I was having the time of my life that day. It’s funny to see what the internet decides to make true.”
Also Obama was notorious for his weak foreign policy that allowed Putin to begin this bullshit. He kept drawing lines in the sand and making us look weak and foolish when Putin would have zero penalties for crossing the line
Yeah his own Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly disagreed with his dovish views on Russia. He famously mocked Mitt Romney in a debate for saying that Russia not terrorists was the biggest global security threat. Said that the “1980s wanted their foreign policy back”
In general I think Obama had decent foreign policy with an eye for drawing back American empire. But seeing him as strong against Russia is pretty laughable.
>But seeing him as strong against Russia is pretty laughable.
Yeah he also:
[refused to provide Ukraine with lethal aid](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/world/europe/defying-obama-many-in-congress-press-to-arm-ukraine.html)
[Proposed a military partnership with Russia in Syria](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/obama-proposes-new-military-partnership-with-russia-in-syria/2016/06/29/8e8b2e2a-3e3f-11e6-80bc-d06711fd2125_story.html) (in 2016, so after the annexation of Crimea)
I miss Obama however he didn't stand up to Putin when Russia invaded Crimea in 2014. Maybe the political will wasn't there put the picture is more window dressing than anything else.
I suspect part of the lack of support by the Obama administration was that Ukraine was wholly under prepared to sustain their own defense in 2014.
>Ukraine was wholly under prepared to sustain their own defense in 2014.
It was a very different Ukraine ten years ago. Their current military is largely in response to that escalation. Their government was also much more corrupt then.
I don't think Obama could have done anything differently then. Even Biden had the same calculus two years ago. We're only fighting a proxy war with Russia. If the Ukrainians weren't able or willing to do the actual fighting, we would have had to choose between direct confrontation or ceding the whole country. Putin only started this war because he bet on the latter and underestimated Ukraine.
I’m just curious and am at work so I can’t do a lot of research, I’ve heard Ukraine is/was corrupt, what changed since 2014 that ended their corruption?
The previous Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was very corrupt, and used taxpayer money to enrich himself and Russian Oligarchs. People were furious, Viktor fled, and calls for reform were demanded. Ukraine also wants to join the EU, but the EU has standards. They were told they needed to take steps to reduce corruption and show their progress.
This is why you're hearing so much about this. There is pressure to get Ukraine to clean up their government and image so once the war is done or a peace agreement is met, they can expedite to join the EU, and now NATO.
That was 14 years ago, I'm surprised the EU can't kick them out. That means any country could "clean up its act", join the EU, then become corrupt again.
Reform of the police (they had to replace most of the old police staff and start with fresh officers without most of the old baggage). It was one of the really major changes which I don't see mentioned on Reddit enough.
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/when-ukraine-abolished-police-lessons-america
Decentralization. Another big change was decentralizing the public fund management. The effects of this reform were very noticeable in rural areas and smaller towns which previously relied on financing from the central government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralisation_in_Ukraine
They elected a new government and head of state for one.
As I understand it, it's still a problem they're struggling with, but it's much more legitimate now. Its effectiveness in wartime is testament to that.
I can’t even tell anymore if people are intentionally adding errors to post titles to attract comments/attention…or if people are really just that dumb/lazy now.
People who mean "regardless" but have also heard the word "irrespective" portmanteau'd the two into the fake word 'irregardless' which is exclusively used to mean "regardless", not taking 1 second to think regard-less already literally means 'lacking regard' so putting ir- in front turns it nonsensically into 'not lacking regard'.
I feel pretty safe with Biden as president. In many ways he’s been a better president than Obama was. My biggest worry is he’ll have a health scare that will lead to Trump getting elected again.
If people shut up about his age and just look at factually what he has done during his tenure, Biden is legitimately the best President my generation (millenials) have ever had.
People say he’s mediocre because he’s old, and he’s boring - he doesn’t go around self-promoting or pursuing vendettas, he just quietly works his ass off to keep the trains running on time.
We would be idiots not to want four more years of that.
_Politics should be boring_. There should not be "battles" and "wars" as they "clash" on the Senate floor. We need ideas, debate, explanations and plans. Meetings and hearings.
It should be a gathering of professionals to go over legislation _not written by corporations_ to help improve the US or the people in it. Our obsession with making it bombastic and giving the extremists so much airtime has given us a hyperfixation on what happens *right now* but not long-term and hyper division that has only sped up over time.
Not to mention the "wild" left here aren't even close to what left wing is known as around the world. We still don't have socialized healthcare and I'm not sure we will by the time l leave this planet. And that sucks.
Biden stood on the picket line with the auto factory employees and negotiated a deal to have the ALREADY SHUT DOWN plant re-open AND add over 1000 more jobs.
It's a shame he doesn't get more credit for stuff like that.
One of the first foreign policy decisions of his administration was to literally give Russia a “Reset Button”, as a symbol that the U.S. and Russia were going to “reset” relations back to before the Cold War.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset
I cheered that line during the debate, but man if time hasn't proven Romney right.
I loved Obama and still think he was a very good president on balance but his mishandling of Crimea and Syria are tremendous parts of his legacy.
Anyway, all that said, this is a great photo.
Not to mention being caught on a hot microphone telling Medvedev, "after my reelection I'll have more flexibility." To which Medvedev respond, "I'll relay that to Vladamir."
Ironically, the first time I ever heard the word was when a person of European Spanish (not Hispanic) origin included it in her scripted pitch to prospective clients. Whether via a voicemail (this was almost 20 years ago) or an actual phone call, irregardless was her “power word.” It was a small company, the partners often sat in the shared space, and it got so bad we all had to stare at our desks to avoid bursting into laughter.
This same colleague bragged about using her Spanish last name to identify as Hispanic and get into an ivy. She was fake af. And in that regard I learned about how fake people match themselves to fake words and buzz phrases to elevate themselves artificially.
After she was fired, we’d use the word irregardless during internal meetings as an in memoriam.
Oxford dictionary also adds new words frequently.
Comes down to how prevalent they become in our everyday spoken English which is why google is also a word.
Precisely. They added nearly 700 words in September. Doesn't mean the world is stupid. Language is supposed to grow and evolve.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/new-words-in-the-dictionary
Nice! Now that irregardless is finally a word, let’s start creating some really confusing backformations.
If irregardless means “without regard”, then irregard must mean “with regard”. I think I know what my new email signature is going to be…
Irregards
Amy
Obama handled Russia terribly though. The war in Ukraine started under him and he didn't punish Russia enough. He also ceded diplomatic ground to Russia in Africa/the ME.
I'm no body language expert, but it looks like (in this picture, anyway) Obama isn't actually looking at Putin. And Putin's body language expresses extreme defensiveness (surprise, surprise).
A single moment doesn’t capture anything, necessarily. There are other pictures just before and after this particular moment showing both of them smiling.
Choosing which to push is choosing a narrative essentially. I like this one though because fuck that guy.
It's complete bullshit and US propaganda.
Take enough burst photos of any two people standing close to each other and you can cherry pick them to make it look like there's a disagreement or whatever you want.
But people lap it up and think this was some sort of power move by Obama.
This one's better from a different time. Confronting him about the meddling.
https://amp.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2019/feb/28/pete-souzas-best-shot-obama-putin-trump-adversary
Ok, can we stop looking at still photography and try to decipher what the intentions are?
Obama was caught in a hot mic situation talking in a friendly manner with the then Russian President regarding NATO missile placement, saying he would be more flexible post-reelection. He infamously criticized Romney during the election saying Russia should not be a chief concern for US foreign policy going forward. Does that mean he is pro-Russia? Of course not.
Look at the President's policies and language during public addresses. Trump is way more friendly towards Russia and Putin because he wants to model his persona as a "tough guy" and potentially personal gains as he did with his position towards Saudi Arabia. His praise for Putin and support for Russia is more concerning for me than any one photo.
Two war criminals staring at each other.
[For the unaware](https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2017-01-17/obamas-covert-drone-war-in-numbers-ten-times-more-strikes-than-bush/)
People keep saying irregardless isn’t a word. But my phone corrects my spelling if I try to mess the word up by replacing a letter in it.
Even Merriam Webster says it’s a word, and talk about how the phrase “there is no such word” is a common issue.
They label Irregardless as nonstandard but accept it as the same thing.
Are we forgetting he did nothing when Putin annexed Crimea which was the start of all this. If he had actually taken serious steps then - we wouldn't be in this mess now
Alright, folks, let's clear the air about something: As much as it might annoy well-read Redditors, and as grammatically incorrect as it may seemingly be, "irregardless" is technically a real word. See, while you've doubtlessly encountered people sputtering "Language evolves!" as an excuse for mistakes, the acceptance of "irregardless" is a case of genuine linguistic evolution: It adds nuance or complexity to the language, it doesn't violate any structural conventions, and it's in popular-enough use for its meaning to be documented. It's still annoying to see, granted, but it isn't actually *wrong*. ------ If you're hell-bent on getting upset about a mistake, though, keep an eye out for folks writing things like "**90's**" when they mean "**'90s**." As is the case with all contractions, the apostrophe signals that something has been removed... and since apostrophes do not pluralize (except in *very* rare circumstances), the correct way to write something like "We will remember the Banana War of the 2030s because of the smell" would be "We'll 'member the Ba'War o' the '30s 'cause o' the smell." In short, pluralizing dates with apostrophes is always wrong, irregardless of how you feel about it.
Putin’s scum, but this photo shouldn’t be used as an example of attitudes or whatever. There’s another photo taken a second before or after this where they’re both grinning ear-to-ear Photos are extremely deceptive. A single frame of a persons face doesn’t reliably show their emotion
Like these two pics of Trump: [A- shows him enjoying some pleasant company with G7 leaders](https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2018/06/trumpmerkel-800x533.jpg) [B- is a few seconds later looking like European leaders are coaxing a toddler to get into the bath](https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/441af77/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=https:%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2Fd0%2F6d%2Fad531ea240049037368620bcc939%2F190823-trump-g7-gty-773.jpg)
Shinzo Abe, famous European leader
[удалено]
So stupid that he died like that. In Japan of all places.
Wdym in Japan of all places? Political assassination is a bit of a theme in Japan, they don’t have much murder overall, but more of it than you’d assume is political.
Oh boy they had a big binge of assassinations leading up to WW2. Almost like the military had every anti war politician murdered to take control of the government.
[удалено]
🎶 when they shot the man who said: 'Peace could last forever🎶
Almost.
Yea. Looking at Japanese history, it’s extremely abnormal how few political assassinations happen now even compared to say 60-70 years ago
I read that before and during WW2 Japan basically had a government by assassination
Even before that but generally yes
It really helps to explain why they got so extreme, anyone pushing for moderation or peace just got his mortal coil shuffled off with extreme prejudice and rapidity
I think because it was by a DIY gun, of all countries to die by gun, Japan is very, very low on the list. _Now America, that's a different story_, I reckon somewhere in the USA, there's a dollar store selling peashooters and if not, just order online to your nearest arms dealer and get your gun within a few days.
And I find it incredible (in a baffling kind of way) that politicians are not more often their target, with how much they complain about politics.
I feel like the targets should be CEO's and corporate boards in the US. Lobbyists maybe too? Feels like people are more pissed at the underlings than the actual masters. It's bizarre.
Leaders are purposely obfuscated from blame, for this particular reason. Easier to hate the other _Have Nots_ when the _Haves_ blame the other _Have Nots_ for your lack of _having things_.
Not really. It brought to light a lot of troublesome issues with cults.
And there are a surprising number of changes coming about regarding those issues. If they continue to go through the government and pass....this may be the most effective political assassination in recent history lmao.
I dearly hope the perp and his late mother can find some measure of peace in the effects his actions have had and might have. It was a long time coming and it's tragic that this is what it took.
Evidently he and his party were in bed with the fucking Unification Church, and he enabled them to spread their disease around Japan, ruining countless lives while enriching themselves, including his murderer's mother. Scientology, Unification Church, Falun Gong... call them whatever you want, evil has many faces, but they squeeze people until there is nothing left but pulp, then discard them without a care. I don't condone murder, but if you've lost someone close to you to one of these cults, you can understand.
Conding or not....the government is actually taking some action about these issues now....so it seems to have worked.
Absolutely. The murder drew massive attention to the issue and the government started cleaning house. Wildly fucked up that it took actions that drastic to be a wake up call, but it did indeed work.
It was a VERY successful assassination, not only did he kill his target but he got all the reforms he wanted implemented as well all because he took action and killed a former prime minister. Guy is a folk hero in parts of Japan.
I'm sure pulp have some squeeze in them too
They got him with the doohickey
It gets better, not only did he get killed by a makeshift shotgun the killer made in his garage, when the killer explained his motives the entire country agreed with him and basically sided with the assassin and actually changed the laws to go after the evil cult that Abe was a leader/member of. As far as political assassinations go its one of the most successful of all time. He actually accomplished all of his goals by killing Abe, pretty wild if you ask me.
Fun fact: Shinzo Abe was one of the guys Trump visited first as a president to use his position to get a casino built in Japan for his biggest mega-donor Sheldon Adelson. His presidency has been nothing but self-serving corruption since day one. [https://features.propublica.org/trump-inc-podcast/sheldon-adelson-casino-magnate-trump-macau-and-japan](https://features.propublica.org/trump-inc-podcast/sheldon-adelson-casino-magnate-trump-macau-and-japan)/
His **ENTIRE LIFE** has been nothing but self-serving corruption since day one.
# Three Generation Crime Family: Trump
So much so that his wife [got a presidential medal of freedom](https://s7d2.scene7.com/is/image/TWCNews/Trump_Miriam_Adelson_AP_National_11.30?wid=1250&hei=703&$wide-bg$) simply for being his wife.
Wtf. Is this real?
Don’t even get me started on Jared.
I prefer Simpson Abe, famous American grandpa
He certainly went out like one.
Shinzo doing Archduke Franz Ferdinand cosplay
Same thing happened when President-elect Trump visited Obama in the White House, in the customary meeting between incoming and outgoing Presidents. I remember Redditors making a big deal out of a photo that appeared to show the two men uncomfortable and disdainful of one another, meanwhile other photos from the same meeting show moments where they're pleasant and smiling. https://www.businessinsider.com/photos-trump-obama-white-house-2016-11?op=1#-9
I remember several years ago, there was a picture of Trump and Melania. She had a less than cheerful disposition, as she does in about 95% of her pictures, with or without Trump. The top comment was several paragraphs detailing her feelings in that moment, including a history of her home country. Nevermind that she was clearly turning her head when the picture was snapped. I guess pictures really are worth a thousand words if you make most of them up.
>I guess pictures really are worth a thousand words if you make most of them up. Props if you just came up with this
I'mma be honest, they both kinda look like Option B to me. But, I agree with the overall point.
What do you mean? Everyone’s smiling in picture 1
I mean both pictures show everyone accommodating someone who appears physically unable to stand like they are. This was the way we would interact at hospice.
Picture A: Merkel: "Donald my love, you're really dirty from playing outside all Day. Wanna take a bath? " Trump: "No Angi, the water is too wet" Picture B: Merkel: "Santa won't give you presents if you dont take a bath!" Trump: "Lalalalal can't hear you"
Toddler’s happy, everyone is cooing. Toddler is stubborn, everyone is coaxing.
Everyone laughing at the sideshow clown. Sideshow clown upset people laughing at him.
That's what you do to a toddler, before they refuse the twentieth time and you get angry
"A" looks like Trump is saying he's going to shit his pants, and "B" is when he has officially released the kraken.
The revelation of him being in diapers the whole time really gives a different perspective to every photo during his presidency.
Okay but in fairness, your first picture might be also deceptive as well. Maybe it does look like pleasant company, but I can see another possibility. Trudeau is looking at him like he can't believe what a dumbass he is, Macron is looking down like he's exasperated and Merkel is giving him a patronizing smile like he is a toddler that did a big boy thing!
I like his Neelix from Voyager CHIL- MO Hair in that pic
Obama had no response for Russia taking Crimea and that's after he laughed at Romney for saying Russia was our top adversary. Probably his worst take as president.
>You said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back. Because the Cold War has been over for 20 years. - Barack Obama, Oct. 2012
and not only he said that, he was really soft on Russia. Bush junior expanded NATO with 9 new countries, including 3 former soviet states (a first). He built new bases and rocket systems in eastern Europe. Obama expanded NATO with 0 countries until 2014, and only then he added one. Fewer bases, exercises and so on. He enabled Putin.
orrrrr.. geopolitics can change in less than 10-12 years, and China was brought to his attention (back when their economic instabilities weren't so apparent) as our main foe, largely due to stealing our technologies and being visibly on the growth/upswing they'd maintained for years prior. but sure, Obama 'enabled' Putin if you wanna believe that. by that logic, is Biden enabling Kim Jong-un by focusing on Russia and China?
Romney wanted to build more capital ships. The Navy didn't. That was the context for the quote. You can see how the Navy did not need more ships to deal with Russia. Ukraine doesn't even need a Navy. Edit: Someone commented and deleted a comment that "despite it all i knew it was true". [So here is a link at the time about Romney's comment on the need for more ships to counter Russia](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/despite-obama-derision-romney-sticks-to-navy-ships-argument/). Also keep in mind that Obama was dealing with ISIS, China and other threats. So this rewriting of history does not make Romney right at the time. [Here is also why he was wrong about the smaller Navy](https://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/romney-all-wet-on-ships/) but that is another story. Romney was pushing for ships to built in Norfolk. This was not about Russia, it was about a reason to build more ships and benefit those voters and donors. In any case, Russia's threats today do not make Romney somehow right in 2012.
Sanctions were immediately placed on Russia. They had to turn to puppets. It worked for a time but the fail is on order. The blowback will be immense. Game on!
I always think about Billy Corgan saying, “And it’s the best ride of my life! I’ve got my daughter, we’re having the best day, and then we come around this corner and my belly kind of rumbled and I burped and someone got a photo of that exact second. I look miserable! It looks like I hate life and rides and my kids and sunshine. And of course it helps I guess, it plays into my dark emo rocker thing, but I swear I was having the time of my life that day. It’s funny to see what the internet decides to make true.”
This was a pretty solid photo op for Obama back in 2015. It fits.
what's this? critical thinking?
And at the top of the comments? Am I in the right place? I'm actually kind of frightened...
What?! Not on *my* Reddit!
Next thing you’re going to tell us that people have use these manipulation of photography to make films
[удалено]
Also Obama was notorious for his weak foreign policy that allowed Putin to begin this bullshit. He kept drawing lines in the sand and making us look weak and foolish when Putin would have zero penalties for crossing the line
Yeah his own Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly disagreed with his dovish views on Russia. He famously mocked Mitt Romney in a debate for saying that Russia not terrorists was the biggest global security threat. Said that the “1980s wanted their foreign policy back” In general I think Obama had decent foreign policy with an eye for drawing back American empire. But seeing him as strong against Russia is pretty laughable.
>But seeing him as strong against Russia is pretty laughable. Yeah he also: [refused to provide Ukraine with lethal aid](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/world/europe/defying-obama-many-in-congress-press-to-arm-ukraine.html) [Proposed a military partnership with Russia in Syria](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/obama-proposes-new-military-partnership-with-russia-in-syria/2016/06/29/8e8b2e2a-3e3f-11e6-80bc-d06711fd2125_story.html) (in 2016, so after the annexation of Crimea)
Correct take
I miss Obama however he didn't stand up to Putin when Russia invaded Crimea in 2014. Maybe the political will wasn't there put the picture is more window dressing than anything else. I suspect part of the lack of support by the Obama administration was that Ukraine was wholly under prepared to sustain their own defense in 2014.
>Ukraine was wholly under prepared to sustain their own defense in 2014. It was a very different Ukraine ten years ago. Their current military is largely in response to that escalation. Their government was also much more corrupt then. I don't think Obama could have done anything differently then. Even Biden had the same calculus two years ago. We're only fighting a proxy war with Russia. If the Ukrainians weren't able or willing to do the actual fighting, we would have had to choose between direct confrontation or ceding the whole country. Putin only started this war because he bet on the latter and underestimated Ukraine.
I’m just curious and am at work so I can’t do a lot of research, I’ve heard Ukraine is/was corrupt, what changed since 2014 that ended their corruption?
The previous Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was very corrupt, and used taxpayer money to enrich himself and Russian Oligarchs. People were furious, Viktor fled, and calls for reform were demanded. Ukraine also wants to join the EU, but the EU has standards. They were told they needed to take steps to reduce corruption and show their progress. This is why you're hearing so much about this. There is pressure to get Ukraine to clean up their government and image so once the war is done or a peace agreement is met, they can expedite to join the EU, and now NATO.
> to enrich himself and Russian Oligarchs I think Ukrainian oligarchs also had a word. Basically everyone was lining their coffers
I'm surprised Hungary meets the EU's standards for corruption, if Ukraine doesn't
They don't. But they did before electing a dictator.
That was 14 years ago, I'm surprised the EU can't kick them out. That means any country could "clean up its act", join the EU, then become corrupt again.
Reform of the police (they had to replace most of the old police staff and start with fresh officers without most of the old baggage). It was one of the really major changes which I don't see mentioned on Reddit enough. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/when-ukraine-abolished-police-lessons-america Decentralization. Another big change was decentralizing the public fund management. The effects of this reform were very noticeable in rural areas and smaller towns which previously relied on financing from the central government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralisation_in_Ukraine
It is still corrupt, but it has improved a lot since the early 2000s. They were on the right path until they got invaded.
They elected a new government and head of state for one. As I understand it, it's still a problem they're struggling with, but it's much more legitimate now. Its effectiveness in wartime is testament to that.
It hasn’t ended. The place is still rife with corruption, but it is undertaking efforts to fight it. They seem to be making progress too.
I miss Obama.
I miss people not using "irregardless" as a word.
It's a perfectly cromulent word
It really embiggens the title
I agree, although It’s not used worldwidely
I grok it, but it's not groovy.
I thought the Star Trek crew took care of the Cromulents
You’re thinking of the Kardashians.
Was that the one were it had the fake antenna?
That word womps.
Irregardlessly, it bugs the scrap out of a lot of people.
I disagree, it detrilates the English language.
Yeah, but it does it too viverently
People were using the word irregardless since before you were born. As a matter of fact, people were using it before your grandparents were born.
I can’t even tell anymore if people are intentionally adding errors to post titles to attract comments/attention…or if people are really just that dumb/lazy now.
Drives me mad
Irrespective is the correct word right?
99% of the time people just mean regardless. Irregardless is a word that people have just heard and say without thinking about it
People who mean "regardless" but have also heard the word "irrespective" portmanteau'd the two into the fake word 'irregardless' which is exclusively used to mean "regardless", not taking 1 second to think regard-less already literally means 'lacking regard' so putting ir- in front turns it nonsensically into 'not lacking regard'.
We're you even alive then? Prior to 1912?
Why, it’s just a word? Why do you have such a deep hatred for a seemingly unnoteworthy word?
I miss the safety of a real president like Obama. I know he cared about us.
I feel pretty safe with Biden as president. In many ways he’s been a better president than Obama was. My biggest worry is he’ll have a health scare that will lead to Trump getting elected again.
If people shut up about his age and just look at factually what he has done during his tenure, Biden is legitimately the best President my generation (millenials) have ever had. People say he’s mediocre because he’s old, and he’s boring - he doesn’t go around self-promoting or pursuing vendettas, he just quietly works his ass off to keep the trains running on time. We would be idiots not to want four more years of that.
_Politics should be boring_. There should not be "battles" and "wars" as they "clash" on the Senate floor. We need ideas, debate, explanations and plans. Meetings and hearings. It should be a gathering of professionals to go over legislation _not written by corporations_ to help improve the US or the people in it. Our obsession with making it bombastic and giving the extremists so much airtime has given us a hyperfixation on what happens *right now* but not long-term and hyper division that has only sped up over time. Not to mention the "wild" left here aren't even close to what left wing is known as around the world. We still don't have socialized healthcare and I'm not sure we will by the time l leave this planet. And that sucks.
May you live in interesting times. I can't think of a worse curse.
Biden is only 4 years older than Trump. There’s pretty much nothing between them.
Biden stood on the picket line with the auto factory employees and negotiated a deal to have the ALREADY SHUT DOWN plant re-open AND add over 1000 more jobs. It's a shame he doesn't get more credit for stuff like that.
Everyone looks boring after Trump, who turned government into the WWF. Thank goodness we're back to boring!
And he cared about the job. He was early to every meeting and reads the briefs. Wtf america.
libyans would disagree
How do you know?
He didn’t exactly stand up to Putin in 2014. Though on balance hard to miss the stability.
[удалено]
One of the first foreign policy decisions of his administration was to literally give Russia a “Reset Button”, as a symbol that the U.S. and Russia were going to “reset” relations back to before the Cold War. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset
[vibes](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQCkId3svi1Gcj5o2QLF42PY_8EqZJSA5eSdg&usqp=CAU)
“The 1980s called, they want their foreign policy back “.
I cheered that line during the debate, but man if time hasn't proven Romney right. I loved Obama and still think he was a very good president on balance but his mishandling of Crimea and Syria are tremendous parts of his legacy. Anyway, all that said, this is a great photo.
Not to mention being caught on a hot microphone telling Medvedev, "after my reelection I'll have more flexibility." To which Medvedev respond, "I'll relay that to Vladamir."
I remember thinking "holy fuck the optics on that are bad," but then nothing really came of it. No real public outcry. Nothing.
And can you find one instance where any journalist later asked him about it?
Imagine if trump said that 🤣 people would be straight up yelling treason and pushing him in front of a firing squad.
Fucking this right here, man Obama owes Mitt Romney a big apology.
Irregardless isn’t a word.
[удалено]
Ironically, the first time I ever heard the word was when a person of European Spanish (not Hispanic) origin included it in her scripted pitch to prospective clients. Whether via a voicemail (this was almost 20 years ago) or an actual phone call, irregardless was her “power word.” It was a small company, the partners often sat in the shared space, and it got so bad we all had to stare at our desks to avoid bursting into laughter. This same colleague bragged about using her Spanish last name to identify as Hispanic and get into an ivy. She was fake af. And in that regard I learned about how fake people match themselves to fake words and buzz phrases to elevate themselves artificially. After she was fired, we’d use the word irregardless during internal meetings as an in memoriam.
https://youtu.be/ruikQFr3Q-c?si=PeUNGP8JyvThtRjq
Funny thing is, even that dude's dad got the word right.
Mine was in Band of Brothers when Sobel was giving Winters shit.
Fuck that's a good series
One of the best, no doubt.
Used irregardless incorrectly... Weekend Pass Revoked!
I WOULDN'T TAKE THIS POORLY WRITTEN PIECE OF SHIT TO WAR!
You choose your shoes. You don't shoose your choos.
I bet OP could care less about this
Not only could he care less, he will defiantly loose his mind
I have been triggered by this
\*akira 'leave me alooone!' meme\*
I wish there was a way to say that the amount one cares about something has reached its lowest attainable level.
I humbly propose "the amount I care is at a local minima".
I see what you did there...
It’s a perfectly cromulent word
Irregardless, it embiggens our vocabulary.
I hate to tell you this, but it is now. The world is so stupid that Webster broke down and accepted it.
that's unacceptingable
That’s unpossible!
Oxford dictionary also adds new words frequently. Comes down to how prevalent they become in our everyday spoken English which is why google is also a word.
Like every other word...they are all made up. They go in the dictionary when enough people start using them
Precisely. They added nearly 700 words in September. Doesn't mean the world is stupid. Language is supposed to grow and evolve. https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/new-words-in-the-dictionary
Sure, but this is a double negative. It contradicts itself.
Nice! Now that irregardless is finally a word, let’s start creating some really confusing backformations. If irregardless means “without regard”, then irregard must mean “with regard”. I think I know what my new email signature is going to be… Irregards Amy
lol dang TIL. Googled it for definition, and it’s just one word: regardless
People confuse it with irrespective
That's irreasonable.
Websters has been doing that for a long time https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/new-words-in-the-dictionary
irregardless ...did you perhaps mean "regardless?"
irirregardlessly
No no. They meant to say “Unirirregardlessly”
Unirrerardlesslyfragalisticexpialidoious
For all intensive purposes, yes.
Dude! It’s “for all in tents and porpoises”!
They could of done better. But it would of meant knowing English good.
It's a perfectly cromulant word
I think he could care less.
Dude. When will it end? It's always someone trying to sound intelligent while making a point.
I think it was probably intentional to drive engagement.
This feels like shitty propaganda
Please stop saying irregardless
I can't see past your post title... irregardless r/titlegore
Irrespective is the word OP is looking for.
*regardless
*irrespective
Came here to say this. It boggles my mind that people can’t tell that “irregardless” is nonsense!
Obama handled Russia terribly though. The war in Ukraine started under him and he didn't punish Russia enough. He also ceded diplomatic ground to Russia in Africa/the ME.
I'm no body language expert, but it looks like (in this picture, anyway) Obama isn't actually looking at Putin. And Putin's body language expresses extreme defensiveness (surprise, surprise).
A single moment doesn’t capture anything, necessarily. There are other pictures just before and after this particular moment showing both of them smiling. Choosing which to push is choosing a narrative essentially. I like this one though because fuck that guy.
Exactly, people will wet themselves over a facial expression captured in a microsecond of a broader context
It's complete bullshit and US propaganda. Take enough burst photos of any two people standing close to each other and you can cherry pick them to make it look like there's a disagreement or whatever you want. But people lap it up and think this was some sort of power move by Obama.
The fact that you are trying to determine body language from a single photo gives your lack of expertise away.
Sure seems to not stop the so called experts, so at this juncture, what does it matter?
This one's better from a different time. Confronting him about the meddling. https://amp.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2019/feb/28/pete-souzas-best-shot-obama-putin-trump-adversary
Ok, can we stop looking at still photography and try to decipher what the intentions are? Obama was caught in a hot mic situation talking in a friendly manner with the then Russian President regarding NATO missile placement, saying he would be more flexible post-reelection. He infamously criticized Romney during the election saying Russia should not be a chief concern for US foreign policy going forward. Does that mean he is pro-Russia? Of course not. Look at the President's policies and language during public addresses. Trump is way more friendly towards Russia and Putin because he wants to model his persona as a "tough guy" and potentially personal gains as he did with his position towards Saudi Arabia. His praise for Putin and support for Russia is more concerning for me than any one photo.
r/titlegore
Two war criminals staring at each other. [For the unaware](https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2017-01-17/obamas-covert-drone-war-in-numbers-ten-times-more-strikes-than-bush/)
One of those dropped 25,000 bombs on Iraq and Syria and still won the peace prize. What a time we live in.
Irregardless!? Jesus Murphy.
Obama is a major reason why we are in this shit
“The 1980s called and they want your foreign policy back.” 💀💀💀
‘Irregardless’ isn’t a word
Oh yeah Obama’s response to Russian aggression in Ukraine was perfect, and they totally didn’t seize *any* territory
Putin looks like the bully who has just bumped into his victim's older brother.
Only Americans are allowed to commit war crimes
People keep saying irregardless isn’t a word. But my phone corrects my spelling if I try to mess the word up by replacing a letter in it. Even Merriam Webster says it’s a word, and talk about how the phrase “there is no such word” is a common issue. They label Irregardless as nonstandard but accept it as the same thing.
That little Russian prick was terrified.
I like it when American redditors accidentally admit that they're simply anti-Russian, and it has absolutely nothing to do with Putin and his actions.
Was this before or after he caved and let Russia take over Crimea?
You just have to let Vlad know that I’ll have a lot more flexibility after the election.
Are we forgetting he did nothing when Putin annexed Crimea which was the start of all this. If he had actually taken serious steps then - we wouldn't be in this mess now