Well, that escalated quickly - Syrian edition
- Thread starter Medic007
- Start date
I hope you are right. That's the argument - that this strengthens our hand without a major military adventure. But as regards atrocities, why was this beyond the pale while ISIS has filmed real life scenes from a SAW movie for years without significant consequence? Asad seems like a garden variety dictator while they seem like over the top 80's action movie villains.
I'm continually amazed at the number of intelligent people who still buy into the whole Russian/election interference thing. Good grief Noam Chomsky even thinks this is a non-story.....Noam Chomsky! That's enough for me, and I don't even like the guy.
Gaddafi was removed from power in Libya without sending in ground troops. It's amazing what US air power can achieve in the right setting. I hope you're correct that this isn't the prelude to dumb things.
What? You act like we have been ignoring ISIS.
"without a significant consequence"?
One difference is that U.S. intelligence determined that the Sarin gas was delivered from the airbase where the missile strike occurred. It is a lot easier to hit key, fixed targets, belonging to the Syrian military, than it is to hit key ISIS targets. ISIS is mobile and hiding among innocent civilians, in order to protect themselves from this type of strike.
Russia definitely interfered in the election.
That does not mean that they had any type of covert relationship with Trump, or members of his team. It does not mean that they hacked into polling places and changed votes. It does not mean that they did anything that they didn't do in prior elections. It does not mean that the outcome would have been different if they had not done anything.
But, they attempted to influence the outcome.
Attempting to influence the outcome is not necessarily interfering, unless we admit to interfering ourselves in other people's elections.
Why is the story not about Saudi Arabia's attempt to influence the ejection?
Also, if Hillary had won, would Russian interference be a story? I think we know it wouldn't be.
Probably not. Did Hillary have any kind of working relationship with Flynn or Manafort? Did she have associates who have/had similar relationships with Russia? This Trump/Russia/Election thing is not entirely based on partisan politics. It may well be nothing but smoke, but there is some smoke.
Attempting to influence the outcome is not necessarily interfering, but it is also not definitively not interfering.
What Mega said,
Plus, are you willing to concede that the interference you suggest may have only realistically been intended to make things a little hairy for Clinton once she assumed power?
It seems the biggest divide in how people judge this election stuff is in assigning intent to what Russia wanted.
Butthurt Hillary supporters say they want awesome backroom dealings with Trump. That he's their boy.
This option is "safespace" in which those people hide. It energizes them to feel "wronged," and they (maybe unknowingly) relish the power they feel in that victimhood, the election was stolen from them (surprise, just like in 2000). At the macro level (speaking domestic politics), it provides a lever by which to continually question the motives of Trump. At the macro level, this isn't about the Russians, it's about blunting Trumps effectiveness as President.
Reality is that most likely Russian intent was to either a. Undermine Hillary to gain some form of post election leverage, or b. The election itself was of secondary concern, and the larger prize is the undermining of US institutions.
So to bring this square, I think most rational people can admit that no election exists in a vacuum, all are influenced, and that a better course of action for those on the left is to simply acknowledge some of the things above to themselves (micro and macro politics) and get on with evolving into a more inclusive party possessing superior ideas.
This is what I just posted about.
By all means, follow through with your witch hunt, but in your moments of lucidity, remember that there's a lot (a lot) of moving pieces and vantage points you are not considering.
You ask questions above that either won't be answered, or you aren't putting the same effort into finding the answers to your own questions as you are pushing the Russia-election thing.
"If no one else is going to step up, the U.S. should step in."
Here's an idea: why don't you pop on over there and straighten those people out. Just leave our 18 year old boys and girls out of it. It's pretty easy to say "we" should do something when the "we" does not include us.
I'm hearing that Trump will use this as a negotiating tool. I hope that is true but I'm not necessarily buying into it. Every time the President does something I hear how he is being very calculated...I'm not too sure about that. He may just be a reactionist. I don't think we'll have WW3 over this but I want us to stay out of this mess. We have women and children brutally dying all of the world. I feel for them...but just can't reach them.
How am I pushing the Russia-election thing?
Go back and read my posts.
I said that Russia attempted to influence the election. That is not an opinion or a conspiracy theory. You and Mega seem to agree.
I said that Manafort and Flynn had some type of relationship with Russia. I am pretty sure that this has been established as fact.
I did not follow those statements up by concluding that it means Trump is in bed with Russia or that Russia has any kind of control over him. I don't know anything for sure. I have not suggested that anything underhanded has happened (beyond Russia attempting to influence the results of the election).
You seem to be hyper-sensitive when it comes to this topic, and are inferring that I said/meant something that I did not.
Of course. It makes sense as a motive behind Russia's actions. That doesn't mean it is accurate, but it is certainly logical.
Also a very plausible explanation.
Unless there is something more nefarious going on between Russia and certain Americans who wanted Trump elected. It seems unlikely, but it is not impossible. I don't think the possibility should be completely ignored. I'm not sure there is any way to get a definitive answer, but I am not opposed to investigating the situation to attempt to get to the truth.
I don't blame Obama for drawing a red line and wanting to do what Biff did yesterday, or backing down when Congress didn't want to. I don't blame Congress or the public for historically declining to get involved, either. Both sides have their points. If Biff is moved by the videos and emotionally responded, that's not entirely good, but maybe that also indicates there's an anti-psychopathic tendency buried under that spray-painted combover? He could be willing to reverse course and pick a public fight with Russia to get heat off his own ass, too.
Assad needs to quit using those chemicals on people. ISIS needs to quit sawing off heads. We don't need to get sucked in, either. Lots of simple answers to this one. So at times like these, I ask myself: "What would styxenammer666 do?" So I smoke a clove cigarette, tighten up my Hitler 'stache, shave a tarantula, sprinkle the stubble (from spider, not my hitler) over a crystal ball, rub my devil necklace and let the answers flow. Right @NZ Poke ? Frank?
Of course Biff had to be Biff and take partisan shots at Obama like a stupid boar when the world looked to the U.S. during an international crisis... but that's relatively inoffensive for Biff. [He took the opportunity to criticize Obama for letting this happen, and you all saw the tweets from Biff then -- Obama did what Trump wanted.] Then he takes the stage in front of a scarlet curtain, sticks his teeth out like Gen. Decker in Mars Attacks, speaks into 1971 country club p.a. system and glares into a teleprompter for his first real international POTUS speech. Sounds about right.
What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall during dinner with Chiney Plesident last night over his well done steak and coca-cola.
You guys should take up a collection for this shit. Truth bombs.
Maybe I should do a styxendoofus 666 video deal?
Assad needs to quit using those chemicals on people. ISIS needs to quit sawing off heads. We don't need to get sucked in, either. Lots of simple answers to this one. So at times like these, I ask myself: "What would styxenammer666 do?" So I smoke a clove cigarette, tighten up my Hitler 'stache, shave a tarantula, sprinkle the stubble (from spider, not my hitler) over a crystal ball, rub my devil necklace and let the answers flow. Right @NZ Poke ? Frank?
Of course Biff had to be Biff and take partisan shots at Obama like a stupid boar when the world looked to the U.S. during an international crisis... but that's relatively inoffensive for Biff. [He took the opportunity to criticize Obama for letting this happen, and you all saw the tweets from Biff then -- Obama did what Trump wanted.] Then he takes the stage in front of a scarlet curtain, sticks his teeth out like Gen. Decker in Mars Attacks, speaks into 1971 country club p.a. system and glares into a teleprompter for his first real international POTUS speech. Sounds about right.
What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall during dinner with Chiney Plesident last night over his well done steak and coca-cola.
You guys should take up a collection for this shit. Truth bombs.
Maybe I should do a styxendoofus 666 video deal?
The "witch hunt" isn't going away withe the white house to nunes to white house machinations/embrassment, refusal to disclose tax returns and financial dealings, Russian @syriadeception bullshit on twitter that's still going on, lying... manaforte, statements from Trumps pre-election that they have russian money, Trumps's denial of deals with Russia... come on. Republicans would be beside themselves. Ya'll investigated Benghazi x 7 (and the Iraq invasion.....how much?) Whitewater special investigator! The clintons lost money in Whitewater. That's like appointing an Atlantic City special prosecutor. Oh no, my beady-eyed little friend, you guys get investigated now.
This was as big a message to Kim Jong-un and Xi Jinping as it was to Assad.
Hyper-sensitive to the topic, no. Even encourage a balanced discussion by all parties. Annoyed at the manic behavior of grown men, yes. @syskatine
Been, the reason I typed all that out to you is because you seem sensible. Others...go in and out of sensible thinking depending on the day. Their lives revolve around a game of gotcha masquerading as a dialogue about concerns or the pursuit of truth. I feel kinda bad for those people, but then again, maybe it gives them meaning/purpose/or a sense of fulfillment.
Sys, take up jogging. Run a 5k by Thankgiving. Completely reasonable expectation no matter what your current fitness level is.
Am I the only one who is greatly amused at the energy sys is spending on styx's oddity while ignoring the fact that he's really good at analyzing current events? So judgmental. So many religious overtones. Damn longhair! Perfect lockstep with how other neocons likely criticize him.
That is a well thought out position. If we don't build up a coalition for a ground war, I can get behind the value of this point of view. If we begin a regime change operation ala Iraq II the sequel, I'm out. It is hard to argue that this did for now crush the Russian puppet nonsense, and gave a tangible sample for Iran, North Korea, China etc. to consider when stirring their usual shit up. I am looking forward to hearing news that we sink one of those Iranian PT boats that harass our ships someday too. But regime change? No. War with Russia? No.
I don't believe we're doing this for purely humanitarian reasons. We should have left them alone.
What is the evidence Assad is the culprit? The Pentagon's chart with the red dots showing the path the Syrian jets took, along with the time frame provided by the Pentagon? What makes you think the American public can believe anything the Pentagon puts out?
John McCain*, Lindsay Graham, Bill Kristol and the rest of the neocon community must be walking around permanent erections at the thought they can witness the killing of huge numbers of people. They must be absolutely orgasmic at the prospect of a two front war. With any luck they can draw Russia into the ME, and China in Korea.
Trump was supposed to be the candidate that was going to keep us out of these conflicts. The writing was on the wall when he introduced his military budget. It turns out he's one of them. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. War is the health of the state. The US government must feel immune right now.
*If you don't know of McCain's history as a Navy pilot, check out the story of his felonious actions on the US Forrestal in 1967, where he was responsible for the death of over 160 fellow seamen, and the injury of another 180 or so, while he was showboating from his jet. The man has no honor.
The chief concern in this situation is how much of it we can pin on BHO.I think this is a good question:
Not really. But it is necessary at times to point out what an absolute disaster everything Obama/Clinton/Kerry did in the middle east was, to also remind how the MSM provided cheerleader like cover for copious lies about what actfully transpired and the disastrous current and likely future effects of Obama era foreign policy in the region. This is particularly true in light of unending withering criticism of every step the Trump administration takes by the MSM and the likes of syskatine.
Good thing Obama's predecessor did such a bang up job in the Middle East.
oh......wait....
Well he did say that Iraq sent the chemical weapons to Syria. HI O
It's all about the long hair, isn't it? Not the Hitler moustache, the occult and magic, not defending nazis or charles manson... I'm picking on him because of his stringy mega hair.
