Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Scout26 on August 26, 2013, 12:27:40 PM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/gen-martin-dempsey-assad-momentum-syria-civil-war-105804508.html?vp=1
Dempsey says that Assad can't maintain this momentum. I disagree. The political lackeys and incompetents in the Army have either been killed or promoted out. The Army is now more professional and becoming better trained. (Yes we saw the Syrian Army's uphill-backwards MOUT operations. ;/ ;)) But they are learning and pushing the FSA back. Add in Russian (and other) support and logistics to replace/repair equipment train troops, throw in some selected chemical strikes and the Syrian Army forces the FSA to quit or get pushed into Iraq. Remember the FSA is not a organized cohesive force. Lots of tribal and ethnic differences and goals, and then you have the AQ a-holes with their own agenda. Either way this is far from over.
And either way we need to STFO.
This is telling also:
Asked whether the United States is providing the Syrian rebels with military aid and weapons, Dempsey replied that the “the Department of Defense is not.” Bolding, mine.
Which means that the CIA, State Dept (see Benghazi), hell, even DHS (via Whack-a-Doodle "Kill Whitey" guy), and the Dept of Commerce, could be shipping (or trans-shipping, see Iran-Contra) to Syria.
Fun, Fun !!!
-
Let the secular and non-secular savages kill each other in gross lots. And let the secular savages ultimately prevail in a weakened state.
-
The more effort they expend killing each other, the less time they have coming over here to gain their 72 virginians.
So, I fully support selling arms to both sides and airing live drone feeds on PPV.
-
Let the secular and non-secular savages kill each other in gross lots. And let the secular savages ultimately prevail in a weakened state.
This, plus: I'm tired of our enemies (and allies) publicly decrying U.S. intervention, while secretly wanting and expecting it. Let the UN, the Arab League, the EU, and whoever else wants to step into the ring, solve this "problem". We have trash in our own yard that needs cleaning up. We cannot, and should not, be the go to solution for every humanitarian crisis.
-
In other conspiratorial news, a caller to the Michael Hart Radio Show today opined that the stuff happening in Syria is being staged by Russian Spetznaz in order to bring America into war with Russia.
Uh, that's World War Three, guys. According to the caller.
I hope he's wrong.
'Cuz if it's Obama vs. Putin I ain't placin' my bets on anyone whose name begins with "O."
-
In other conspiratorial news, a caller to the Michael Hart Radio Show today opined that the stuff happening in Syria is being staged by Russian Spetznaz in order to bring America into war with Russia.
Uh, that's World War Three, guys. According to the caller.
I hope he's wrong.
'Cuz if it's Obama vs. Putin I ain't placin' my bets on anyone whose name begins with "O."
Uhm. I call tin foil. Please tell me this is not the Project Gutenberg Michael Hart, he always seemed like an intelligent person.
Russians will sell or give weapons to whomever they wish. Russia doesn't want a war with the US, and neither does the US. Even back during the Cold War, both sides went to great pains to annoy the other via proxies. That is very likely. Russian forces managing to keep themselves incognito? Unlikely, that.
-
Uhm. I call tin foil. Please tell me this is not the Project Gutenberg Michael Hart, he always seemed like an intelligent person.
Russians will sell or give weapons to whomever they wish. Russia doesn't want a war with the US, and neither does the US. Even back during the Cold War, both sides went to great pains to annoy the other via proxies. That is very likely. Russian forces managing to keep themselves incognito? Unlikely, that.
Agreed. Selling Assad weapons and tacitly backstopping him in the Security Council seems to accomplish everything Putin wants. No need for more.
-
Uhm. I call tin foil. Please tell me this is not the Project Gutenberg Michael Hart, he always seemed like an intelligent person.
Russians will sell or give weapons to whomever they wish. Russia doesn't want a war with the US, and neither does the US. Even back during the Cold War, both sides went to great pains to annoy the other via proxies. That is very likely. Russian forces managing to keep themselves incognito? Unlikely, that.
I'm not sure who you mean by "Project Gutenberg Michael Hart." The Michael Hart I am refering to runs a radio talk show from Birmingham, Alabama from 10:06AM through 1:00PM weekdays. I don't listen to the entire program; he used to be on at 6:00AM and I listened to him a lot more back then but I never heard him mention anything about Gutenberg.
As to the story about Russia being behind Syria, you understand I wasn't endorsing the "conspiracy theory," I was only reporting it. I hope it isn't true. I suspect Spetznaz probably are sufficiently competent to keep themselves covert atleast until American forces are there to pull back the covers. My reason for disbelieving the story is Russia is in a worse economic condition than we are, and have been there longer. I highly doubt they are in any way ready for or want a Third World War.
I was merely reporting what I'd heard for entertainment value.
[popcorn]
Shame on me. :angel:
-
Russia doesn't want a war with the US, and neither does the US.
I dunno ... sometimes it does seem as if the US is at war with itself ... =|
-
Why would the Russians want a war with us, when they already have the White House, half of Congress, and a solid grip on many Federal agencies? ???
-
is it bad when john kerry says its "when not if" we intervene :facepalm: :facepalm:
-
Russians don't want a war with us. Bad for Business. Selling Assad enough weapons to keep the fighting going. That's good for business. A long slow "win" is their best interest. "See look at Syria, used Russian made weapons and won the Civil War over those that had American supplied weapons*. Clearly our stuff is better, nyet?"
* not mentioning that "American Supplied Weapons" were Soviet stuff from Libya among others.
-
This is all a smokescreen to distract the US news cycle and population away from NSA, Snowden, Obamacare, Amnesty and the other issues making government unpopular right now.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg262.imageshack.us%2Fimg262%2F9223%2Fvchancellor.jpg&hash=be9b1b7b638b4ce3b4cbf375e3ec8b5760a3f196)
"I want everyone to remember why they need us!"
-
Even back during the Cold War, both sides went to great pains to annoy the other via proxies.
Mostly...
-
Obama worries me. I am afraid the incompetent jackass know-it-all is going to inadvertently push the wrong button so to speak.-and start WWIII. Syria is nothing to us. But it is a Big Damn Deal to the Russians.
The problem with narcissists is they simply cannot put themselves in another's place, or try to think like the opposition-it is all about them, all the time.
-
John *expletive deleted*ing Kerry (he has 3 purple hearts ya know) is really ramping up the rhetoric and beating the war drums.
My money is that Obama is just arrogant enough to at least launch missle strikes.
I hope I'm wrong.
-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/
didn't we suspect?
-
This is all a smokescreen to distract the US news cycle and population away from NSA, Snowden, Obamacare, Amnesty and the other issues making government unpopular right now.
"I want everyone to remember why they need us!"
This
-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/
didn't we suspect?
Carla del Ponte. Yep, her word is definitely good. ;/
-
If we were to have a civil war here, would we want other countries to intervene? I wouldn't. At least no more involvement than regular commerce, buying and selling whatever.
I feel the same about Syria. It's their war, not ours. Let them fight it out themselves. If it works out to be good for us, great. If not, cross that bridge when it arrives.
-
We shouldn't rush into this. We need at least 17 or 18 UN resolutions (along with UN and international support and backing), and several years of debate in the Congress before voting to be for the war, and then to vote against it.
-
If we were to have a civil war here, would we want other countries to intervene? I wouldn't. At least no more involvement than regular commerce, buying and selling whatever.
I feel the same about Syria. It's their war, not ours. Let them fight it out themselves. If it works out to be good for us, great. If not, cross that bridge when it arrives.
Seems to me that around 1776 (or so) certain colonial revolutionaries were moderately happy to have some assistance from the French ... and the Poles ... and ...
-
I wouldn't want other countries intervening here either, but largely only for the reason that just about every country that would intervene would support the "other" side.
-
Has anyone proven that the Syrian government actually did use chemical weapons?
-
Has anyone proven that the Syrian government actually did use chemical weapons?
What difference, at this point, does it make?
-
What difference, at this point, does it make?
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.fd.uproxx.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FGiant-Bird-seewhatyoudidthere.jpg&hash=979e75f99235d8f9a6a90f36724650e30a2f2a04)
-
I guess that I should keep a look out my north windows to see if any missles are going up =(
-
What difference, at this point, does it make?
None. The story has been decided upon since some time now. Assad = ultimatest evil, probably twirling his moustache. FSA = capable of doing nothing wrong. It carries it's own momentum now. People "know" that the Assad regime used chemical weapons...even if it turns out they actually didn't. People will demand that Something Is Done. Media will show pictures of crying women and children and only show those FSA fighters who aren't al-Qauida, or who can be relied upon to atleast act like they aren't al-Quaida.
-
I don't understand. Iraq was not that long ago.
Is this what it feels like to watch your country go to a completely unnecessary war? I guess every generation has one.
Pure, unadulterated folly coming from Hagel and Kerry.
-
I don't understand. Iraq was not that long ago.
Is this what it feels like to watch your country go to a completely unnecessary war? I guess every generation has one.
Pure, unadulterated folly coming from Hagel and Kerry.
Don't forget Senator John "I never met a country I didn't like--TO BOMB!!" McCain and Jocasse's favorite Senator Lindsey Graham.
-
If Obama had a son, he would look like the Syrian rebels.
Perhaps Big O will see a blinding light on the road to Damascus.
-
Has anything come from the reports it was the rebels using chemical weapons? Confirmed, denied?
-
Carla del Ponte. Yep, her word is definitely good. ;/
As Switzerland's former attorney general and with a stint as the Swiss ambassador to Argentina, her word is every bit as good as anything coming from people like Robert Gibbs, Jay Carney, and John Kerry.
Probably better.
-
Did somebody mention WWIII?
http://abcnews.go.com/International/russia-warns-catastrophic-consequences-us-meddles-syria/story?id=20081747 (http://abcnews.go.com/International/russia-warns-catastrophic-consequences-us-meddles-syria/story?id=20081747)
Russian officials today hit back at the United States and its allies after Secretary of State John Kerry warned Monday that the Syrian government would face consequences for last week's alleged chemical weapons attack.
-
Don't forget Senator John "I never met a country I didn't like--TO BOMB!!" McCain and Jocasse's favorite Senator Lindsey Graham.
Don't get me started on Lindsey
-
Don't get me started on Lindsey
Oh please do. [popcorn] [popcorn]
-
Perhaps Big O will see a blinding light on the road to Damascus.
Nicely done, sir. Nicely done, indeed.
-
Rebels use of Chemical weapons:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/23/us-syria-crisis-chemicals-activists-idUSBRE97M0HB20130823
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2320223/UN-accuses-Syrian-rebels-carrying-sarin-gas-attacks-blamed-Assads-troops.html
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/UN-strongly-suspects-Syrian-rebels-used-sarin-gas-312178
Which makes sense. Obama has said use of Chemical weapons is a "Red Line". The Syrian Army has been pushing back the FSA, so they are "losing". Play the Chemical Weapons trump card (it's played like the race card) and hopefully get the international community on your side to send weapons, cruise missiles and maybe even ground troops.
-
Rebels use of Chemical weapons:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/23/us-syria-crisis-chemicals-activists-idUSBRE97M0HB20130823
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2320223/UN-accuses-Syrian-rebels-carrying-sarin-gas-attacks-blamed-Assads-troops.html
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/UN-strongly-suspects-Syrian-rebels-used-sarin-gas-312178
Which makes sense. Obama has said use of Chemical weapons is a "Red Line". The Syrian Army has been pushing back the FSA, so they are "losing". Play the Chemical Weapons trump card (it's played like the race card) and hopefully get the international community on your side to send weapons, cruise missiles and maybe even ground troops.
This
As I said elsewhere, Assad using chemical weapons makes no sense whatsoever. He knows that if he did, the US will intervene. Syrian army was winning. The only possibility that makes sense to me, is that the rebels use the weapons in order to draw us into the conflict ...
And if I am convinced of this, people within the US government are too
I believe that they know this is the truth, and are twisting the story to serve their goals
-
I just read a comment, that said even if the rebels did use the chemical weapons, It is still the Syrian regime's fault For not properly securing them
This country is so full of morons
-
If it weren't gas attacks, it would be mass machete or machine gun murder.
It doesn't matter.
We need to stay out, but unfortunately obama, kerry, and the other bozos have been running their yaps on what the US will or won't do. :facepalm:
-
I don't understand. Iraq was not that long ago.
Is this what it feels like to watch your country go to a completely unnecessary war? I guess every generation has one.
Pure, unadulterated folly coming from Hagel and Kerry.
Iraq was a logical and completely sensible decision next to this.
In fact, this (if the attacks take place) may be the most idiotic foriegn policy decision taken by any major state / group of states in recorded history.
-
Iraq was a logical and completely sensible decision next to this.
I dunno. it seems pretty similar. Only real difference in my mind is the threat of interference from other countries.
-
Syria had a nice bio weapons program as well. All kinds of nasty bugs.
Be just the thing for Assad to use in retaliation.....
The US has had the nearly unheard of advantage of fighting every war since the civil war "over there".
One of these days we are going to get a horrific wake up call. War will come home.
-
Our navy should keep the Suez Canal and any other watery places over there open. Protect the free flow of oil and gas and whatever else moves by water in the middle east. Beyond that, let those tribalists slug it out on their own and let the best goat fondler win.
-
Soooooo, if it turns out that rebels/FSA used chemical weapons, crossing Obama's "Red Line", does that mean we intervene on the side of Assad and the Syrian Army?
[popcorn] [popcorn]
-
Soooooo, if it turns out that rebels/FSA used chemical weapons, crossing Obama's "Red Line", does that mean we intervene on the side of Assad and the Syrian Army?
[popcorn] [popcorn]
How dare you insinuate that the freedom fighters did any wrong
-
Soooooo, if it turns out that rebels/FSA used chemical weapons, crossing Obama's "Red Line", does that mean we intervene on the side of Assad and the Syrian Army?
[popcorn] [popcorn]
Of course not.
Because if Assad hadn't had them in the first place, the rebels wouldn't have been able to use them
-
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/965455_587511697958842_488341024_o.jpg)
-
I wouldn't want other countries intervening here either, but largely only for the reason that just about every country that would intervene would support the "other" side.
That's exactly what I was thinking.
-
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/965455_587511697958842_488341024_o.jpg)
Obama Charlie don't surf.
FTR, Robert Duvall rocks.
-
Obama Charlie don't surf.
FTR, Robert Duvall rocks.
I agree with that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPXVGQnJm0w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPXVGQnJm0w)
-
And now they are playing on our "Look, they are down to slingshots and water balloons !!! We have to help them.
What they don't realize is that there are quite a few people in this country that if push came to shove have not only the skills to make these improvised weapons, but even better stuff and more of it.
http://news.yahoo.com/photos/improvised-weapons-of-syria-slideshow/
-
And now they are playing on our "Look, they are down to slingshots and water balloons !!! We have to help them.
Only if our aim is to prolong the fighting.
-
Something to think about as Obama moves us closer to war in Syria.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/does-obama-know-hes-fighting-on-alqaidas-side-8786680.html
-
We're going to have to invade Syria to find out what's in it.
http://www.caintv.com/obama-et-al-discuss-syria-on-f
-
Something to think about as Obama moves us closer to war in Syria.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/does-obama-know-hes-fighting-on-alqaidas-side-8786680.html
I am sure he does and approves of the message.
-
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/28/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html
"The West handles the Islamic world the way a monkey handles a grenade," Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted."
-
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/28/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html
"The West handles the Islamic world the way a monkey handles a grenade," Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted."
Rogozin has a gift for pithiness. ;) I think I will steal that!
-
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/28/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html
"The West handles the Islamic world the way a monkey handles a grenade," Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted."
Oooh, racist! =D
Too bad they don't have a leftist media over there to make him resign in disgrace. :facepalm:
-
And if we do go, we go alone. Even the Brits ain't interested in getting involved in Syria. If they aren't going, not one European country will go either.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/29/uks-cameron-loses-preliminary-vote-syria/
-
Constant Phoenix is flying sorties vs. Syria right now. That means the White House is looking for something (anything?) concrete...
http://theaviationist.com/tag/constant-phoenix/#.Uh_j9E3K6Hs
-
Constant Phoenix is flying sorties vs. Syria right now. That means the White House is looking for something (anything?) concrete...
http://theaviationist.com/tag/constant-phoenix/#.Uh_j9E3K6Hs
Or they're expecting to trigger a nuclear war :facepalm:
Although you would thing the bright flashes and big clouds would make it rather obvious ;/
-
Constant Phoenix is flying sorties vs. Syria right now. That means the White House is looking for something (anything?) concrete...
http://theaviationist.com/tag/constant-phoenix/#.Uh_j9E3K6Hs
Why is a nuclear detection plane useful for proving chemical weapons use?
-
Why is a nuclear detection plane useful for proving chemical weapons use?
About as useful as Obama?
-
My guess is they're looking for something, even a component molecule or precursor, if not an actual agent or decomposition product.
The Constant Phoenix has whole air and particulate collection suites. Whole air isn't so great, because it uses engine bleed air, which itself is tapped off the 7th compressor stage in a P&W TF-33 engine. (HOT!)
The 13" filter papers, however, might gather something useful.
My guess is the White House Situation Room called the JCS, and directed a sortie with expectations they might get at least some kind of evidence.
They tasked us to fly after the shuttle re-entry accident, too. We found a lot of burnt stuff floating in the air. =D
-
Why does Russia give a damn about Syria? I could understand (maybe) if we were back in the bad ol' days, a bipolar world where proxies mattered more. For the life of me, I can't imagine Bad Vlad making raising the stakes, knowing that jackass in the Whitehouse is gonna have us throwing punches PDQ. Can anyone enlighten me?
-
Bidness.
Russia makes a metric buttload o' money selling arms and ammo to the Syrian .gov.
It's not about Ideology but about the Rubles.
-
Bidness.
Russia makes a metric buttload o' money selling arms and ammo to the Syrian .gov.
It's not about Ideology but about the Rubles.
ain't enough bidness in that town to warrant that kind of risky stance. JMHO. I mean, it's not pricey aircraft, or sophisticated armor, or top shelf anti-air. Most of what these savages are killing each other with are a glut on the market. Syria is doesn't have a pot to piss in, or a window to throw it out of, anyway.
Otoh, I have no other plausible explanation.
-
Syria give Russia a foothold in the region.
-
Also, Syria is traditionally Russia's backyard. As they aim for renewed superpower status they put up with less crap in what they consider their turf. We'd be torqued off if Russia or China decided to come over and get actively involved in a conflict in say...Honduras or Belize.
-
And if we do go, we go alone. Even the Brits ain't interested in getting involved in Syria. If they aren't going, not one European country will go either.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/29/uks-cameron-loses-preliminary-vote-syria/
To put it in context, that is the first time that any British government has lost a vote over going to or maintaining a war (which is what it was, however Cameron tries to pretend it was just a consultative motion) since North lost the vote in 1782 that ended the attempts to flog the dead horse of the Revolutionary War.
Nor should it have been that much of a surprise to Cameron, given that the debate basically consisted of four or five hours of various senior Tory backbenchers lining up to give the measure a kicking, aided by the more usual Labour suspects and supported an overwhelmingly negative (especially amongst the ex-Generals and Admirals) Lords. The debate ruthlessly exposed how mindless this proposed course of action is.
-
Agricola, that's ok, we'll pick up the slack for your team. :(
Chris
-
For once I'll agree with the Brit parliment. Sadly Obama will likely go ahead and do something stupid and make the mess even worse. My bet is before the long weekend is over.
-
Agricola, that's ok, we'll pick up the slack for your team. :(
Chris
You mean like the UK and NATO did for us in Libya?
-
ain't enough bidness in that town to warrant that kind of risky stance. JMHO. I mean, it's not pricey aircraft, or sophisticated armor, or top shelf anti-air. Most of what these savages are killing each other with are a glut on the market. Syria is doesn't have a pot to piss in, or a window to throw it out of, anyway.
Otoh, I have no other plausible explanation.
If we start sending planes into Syria, Russia might just decide to have Syria test some new hardware.
-
If we start sending planes into Syria, Russia might just decide to have Syria test some new hardware.
Why not? We got Israil to beta test our hardware, Putin might as well get some good data. Come to think of it, real world data on current Russian hardware is the first useful thing I've heard we could get out of Syria.
'Course the data might end up being a mite expensive. =|
-
Kerry says Assad did it. The Intelligence Community says they did it.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/30/john-kerry-syrian-regime-killed-1429-people-chemic/
The same Intelligence Community that blew 9/11 ?
The same Intelligence Community that screwed the pooch on WMD's in Iraq ?
The guys that totally missed the "Arab Spring" ? (Still on-going, btw)
The same ones that "told" you that the four Americans getting killed in Benghazi was due to a video ?
We're supposed to once more risk American Lives (and borrowed Treasure) based on the word of those clowns ??
Seriously?!?!?! They've killed over 100,000 on each side, and you expect us to start pounding the war drums over 1,349 who HATE US and died because the air was yucky ?? If they had killed them with artillery or rockets or bullets, that's okay, but yucky air is right out !!!
If it's so all fired-up important, then answer me these questions three (ten my leige) Fine ten.*
1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?
9. What about the sequester, it's reduced the US Forces and Defense spending. Are you going to sit down with Congress and work out a solution ?
10. This Congress agreed to "PayGo" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAYGO). Where you must "Pay as You Go", what other spending will be cut to pay for these operations?
*1-8 are the "Powell Doctrine" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_Doctrine), named after Colin Powell. It states that all those (at least the first eight) must be answered before the US commits to Military operations.
I still say our best answer is to sit this one out. But if Obama goes ahead without Congressional approval, all hell will break loose.
-
*expletive deleted*ck it
Anything to accelerate the inevitable collapse is a good thing. That's my new position
-
*expletive deleted* it
Anything to accelerate the inevitable collapse is a good thing. That's my new position
Sad to say, but I do agree and think the apple cart needs to be turned over.
-
http://www.examiner.com/article/breaking-news-rebels-admit-gas-attack-result-of-mishandling-chemical-weapons
-
*expletive deleted* it
Anything to accelerate the inevitable collapse is a good thing. That's my new position
Avoid the financial collapse of the American Empire by committing global suicide ? =|
-
*expletive deleted* it
Anything to accelerate the inevitable collapse is a good thing. That's my new position
Welcome to my world.
-
Avoid the financial collapse of the American Empire by committing global suicide ? =|
Nope
Accelerate the collapse so we can start over
-
Nope
Accelerate the collapse so we can start over
The truth burns.
-
Nope
Accelerate the collapse so we can start over
I'm all for that, except it's hard to start over when you're dead.
-
You're safe, Tallpine.
You're so far out there in the sticks that even a mass extinction event would take a decade or so to reach you. ;)
-
Well, since he can't get Britain to do something and those pesky Chinese and Russian are going to say Bu and Nyet in the Security Council, so there will be no action or even resolution from the UN. Oh, John Kerry, how can we do anything militarily without the UN's approval.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/12/30/Top-Ten-Worst-John-Kerry-Foreign-Policy-Mistakes
And ready to eat your own words there Mr. Secretary ?
http://www.issues2000.org/2004/John_Kerry_War_+_Peace.htm
-
Russia has said, correctly, that unilateral intervention by the US is a violation of international law. Since Obama is justifying his attack based on Syria's violation of international law, couldn't Russia make the same claim against the US?
I don't believe for a minute that they'll attack the US in the US but I can't help but wonder if they'd try to destroy our Mideast attack capability under a claim of moral superiority just like Obama is making.
-
Anyone taking any special precautions this weekend? I'm keeping the gas tanks topped off. Anything else?
-
You're safe, Tallpine.
You're so far out there in the sticks that even a mass extinction event would take a decade or so to reach you. ;)
I dunno ... we still have a lot of missle silos not very far from me. I suppose those are on Russia's target list.
We bomb Syria.
Syria bombs Israel.
Isreal incinerates Syria.
What could go wrong ??? :facepalm:
-
Isn't gutting Syria all about hurting Iran?
And isn't hurting Iran all about keeping regional "allies" safe and under American influence?
And isn't keeping regional "allies" safe and under American influence all about keeping the petrodollar alive and well?
Protecting the dollars-for-oil monopoly... because that's all we got.
-
Syria will NOT do anything to Israel. The Assad regime has it's hands full with the FSA/rebels. They don't need another front/fight to deal with.
Even though they hate Israel with a passion, Assad's smart enough to keep Israel out of this. If he wasn't, he'd have already attacked them by now.
Assad is content to keep this within the borders of Syria, besides, he's winning on the ground. Pushing the rebels back, slowly but surely. My bet is that within a year, there will be a "Peace Conference" and Syria, gets divided along tribal (or ending battle) lines, ala Germany and North Korea.
-
Well of course he does....
John Kerry snubs British, praises cheese-eating surrender monkeys. (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/30/john-kerry-praises-french-snubs-british/)
-
Color me surprised-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/31/president-obama-says-us-must-act-on-syria/
-
Kerry is for bombing Syria before he is going to be against it.
-
Kerry is for bombing Syria before he is going to be against it.
And that's after being against such things in the first place, after being for them. And then being for them before being against them.
And all that jazz.
-
Now that I think about it for a moment, maybe this is his way of tucking tail while being able to save at least some face. He's run around talking big and bad and at every turn his plan has fallen apart and his bluff has been called.
So an adult in the room probably sat him down, explained it's over, and rather than doubling down on the stupid they come up with a plan to loose minimal face.
He knows full well the votes aren't there for congressional approval. So he "lets" it go to congress for debate and a vote, he takes a hit for being bitch slapped by congress, but he gets to spin it as "reluctantly" being unable to act. Still losses some face, but a hell of a lot better than his bluff being called and pretty much every other player in this game having made him his bitch.
And if by some miracle it goes through, he can blame congress when it falls apart. And if by some miracle we are harmed by leaving it to them to sort out, he can blame congress for keeping him from acting.
-
Not just blame Congress, but blame Republicans.
"I wanted to stop the violence in Syria, I was ready to stop the violence in Syria, but the stonewalling, do-nothing Republicans prevented me for acting and stopping the violence in Syria."
Here's an idea Oh, winner of Nobel Peace Prize. Why do you go earn it. See if you can do a TR* and pull both sides into the same room and work something out.
*The Russo-Japanese War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Japanese_War#Peace_and_aftermath), granted by that time the Japanese had kicked the crap out of the Russians, twice, (well maybe six or seven times, depending on how you count) along with a weak economy and various revolutions caused the Russians to head to the peace table. (Hmmmm, why does that should sound familiar.)
-
Why not? We got Israil to beta test our hardware, Putin might as well get some good data. Come to think of it, real world data on current Russian hardware is the first useful thing I've heard we could get out of Syria.
'Course the data might end up being a mite expensive. =|
That is my thought also. Is bombing Syria worth even one US life? I doubt it is even worth the bombs we would use.
-
Syria will NOT do anything to Israel. The Assad regime has it's hands full with the FSA/rebels. They don't need another front/fight to deal with.
Even though they hate Israel with a passion, Assad's smart enough to keep Israel out of this. If he wasn't, he'd have already attacked them by now.
Assad is content to keep this within the borders of Syria, besides, he's winning on the ground. Pushing the rebels back, slowly but surely. My bet is that within a year, there will be a "Peace Conference" and Syria, gets divided along tribal (or ending battle) lines, ala Germany and North Korea.
The opportunity to fight a common enemy might be too much to pass up for either side. It's a common way out of political problems at home.
-
That is my thought also. Is bombing Syria worth even one US life? I doubt it is even worth the bombs we would use.
I was thinking that we have such a huge budget surplus that we need to burn up a bunch of money on another war.
-
If we start sending planes into Syria, Russia might just decide to have Syria test some new hardware.
I can't believe I agree with him, but the other day I heard Denis Kucinich say that bombing Assad would mean we're functioning as Al-Qaeda's air force.
***********************************************************************************
Here's a thought: Suppose the U.S. Congress votes NO on bombing Syria. Further suppose that Obama says <expletive> to the Congress and issues orders for an attack anyway.
Now consider a scenario that has maybe a 0.01% chance of coming about: What if the U.S. military declines to attack, citing the Congressional vote, and states that they swore an oath to the Constitution, and not Obama personally?
This is probably the longest of long shots, but it would be very interesting to see this play out. [popcorn]
-
I was thinking that we have such a huge budget surplus that we need to burn up a bunch of money on another war.
Your math is off. [popcorn]
-
I can't believe I agree with him, but the other day I heard Denis Kucinich say that bombing Assad would mean we're functioning as Al-Qaeda's air force.
***********************************************************************************
Here's a thought: Suppose the U.S. Congress votes NO on bombing Syria. Further suppose that Obama says <expletive> to the Congress and issues orders for an attack anyway.
Now consider a scenario that has maybe a 0.01% chance of coming about: What if the U.S. military declines to attack, citing the Congressional vote, and states that they swore an oath to the Constitution, and not Obama personally?
This is probably the longest of long shots, but it would be very interesting to see this play out. [popcorn]
I would pull the switch on the electric chair for any general who refuses the order. The last thing I want to see in this country is a military coup and just as soon as the military starts making the decisions instead of the civilians that is what we have.
I had an employee on my team once - I was not the supervisor; I was the lead developer. This employee, in his first year out of college, decided he knew more than me and refused to do what I asked him to do more than one time. The supervisor didn't back me up. I was no longer able to function as the lead so I moved into a different team in the company. Once a subordinate learns they can refuse orders without consequences then they have usurped the authority of their superior.
There is the expectation that the military would refuse an unconstitutional order but this is nowhere near so constitutionally questionable that it could be refused as unconstitutional.
-
I was thinking that we have such a huge budget surplus that we need to burn up a bunch of money on another war.
Among my first thoughts were that ; if we pull out of Iraq/ A-stan how will it look for O if all these young folks start hitting the job market & there are none to be found?
-
I would pull the switch on the electric chair for any general who refuses the order. The last thing I want to see in this country is a military coup and just as soon as the military starts making the decisions instead of the civilians that is what we have.
I had an employee on my team once - I was not the supervisor; I was the lead developer. This employee, in his first year out of college, decided he knew more than me and refused to do what I asked him to do more than one time. The supervisor didn't back me up. I was no longer able to function as the lead so I moved into a different team in the company. Once a subordinate learns they can refuse orders without consequences then they have usurped the authority of their superior.
There is the expectation that the military would refuse an unconstitutional order but this is nowhere near so constitutionally questionable that it could be refused as unconstitutional.
I sure as hell wouldn't fault a commander for refusing to follow such a blatantly illegal order.
-
I sure as hell wouldn't fault a commander for refusing to follow such a blatantly illegal order.
Not to mention such a blatantly insane order.
-
One if the most central duties for us, is the duty to refuse an illegal or unlawful order.
-
I would pull the switch on the electric chair for any general who refuses the order. The last thing I want to see in this country is a military coup and just as soon as the military starts making the decisions instead of the civilians that is what we have . . . There is the expectation that the military would refuse an unconstitutional order but this is nowhere near so constitutionally questionable that it could be refused as unconstitutional.
So the President has absolute authority to unleash our military on anyone he wants so, including committing the USA to a war over the objections of Congress with a country that has NOT attacked the USA or its allies and with no U.N. mandate . . . got it.
Would you please direct me to the portion of the Constitution that expressly grants this power exclusively to the President? ???
-
One if the most central duties for us, is the duty to refuse an illegal or unlawful order.
So the President has absolute authority to unleash our military on anyone he wants so, including committing the USA to a war over the objections of Congress with a country that has NOT attacked the USA or its allies and with no U.N. mandate . . . got it.
Would you please direct me to the portion of the Constitution that expressly grants this power exclusively to the President? ???
DING DING DING!
Just because the pres is the CIC doesn't give him the ability to tell the military to do whatever he wants, nor does it oblige leadership to follow an order that is given illegally. Such as, oh I don't know, attack a country which congress has expressly said shall NOT be attacked.
-
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[1
I see nothing about do what the president says, no matter what.
So says the ossifers. For us proles we get a line about obeying the orders of the president and the officers appointed over us. That comes after the support and defend the Constitution part though. An illegal order is no order at all.
But it should never get to that. Such an executive override ought to spark immediate impeachment. Electric chair for generals who disdain the Nuremberg cop-out? So, what punishment for presidents who completely gut the separation of powers? An officer corps that has to do whatever the president says is also a military coup, one run by the CinC.
-
You might all be right. It might be unconstitutional but no more so than attacking Iraq or Afghanistan. But the courts and Congress have all accepted those wars. Now it will be up to Congress and the courts to clean it up. There's precedence supporting the President's authority - which I agree he does not actually have.
I know we all hate this president and most of us hate the idea of yet another middle-eastern war. But I also love my country and do not want to see us have a military coup.
This is not at all the same as Nuremberg. Obama is not considering gassing civilians, creating concentration camps for Syrians, or genocide. He's talking about the same kind of missile shoots that Clinton did during the 90's and much less that what both Obama and Bush have done in drone shooting througout the middle-east.
I think it's stupid to attack Syria. I think the repercussions could be serious for our nation. I despise Obama and Congress and want to see them all thrown out. I hope Congress would impeach him if he does attack. With all of those things, I am with the group here but the last thing I want to see is our armed services refusing to follow an order - especially if Congress goes along.
-
You might all be right. It might be unconstitutional but no more so than attacking Iraq or Afghanistan. But the courts and Congress have all accepted those wars.
Wait, what? Bush had Congressional approval for both those wars before the shooting started. How were they unconstitutional?
-
This is not at all the same as Nuremberg. Obama is not considering gassing civilians, creating concentration camps for Syrians, or genocide. He's talking about the same kind of missile shoots that Clinton did during the 90's and much less that what both Obama and Bush have done in drone shooting througout the middle-east.
I was just following orders... We're talking a hypothetical if Congress said no and Barack said yes anyway. That's a Constitutional crisis we haven't seen, and won't because he's too scared.
-
Wait, what? Bush had Congressional approval for both those wars before the shooting started. How were they unconstitutional?
This
-
Wait, what? Bush had Congressional approval for both those wars before the shooting started. How were they unconstitutional?
Funny how Obama is more like Bush than even Bush ;/
-
Wait, what? Bush had Congressional approval for both those wars before the shooting started. How were they unconstitutional?
^This.
They can whine, cry, wring their hands, and be against it before they were for it and got against it again, but congress approved both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and iirc a more vague authorization against Al Qaeda in general but don't quote me on that one. That means there wasn't a damned thing illegal about it. The merits can be questioned all we want, but it damn sure wasn't illegal.
But I also love my country and do not want to see us have a military coup.
What coup? The military refusing to follow an illegal unilateral order from the President, one which is perhaps in direct opposition of the orders of Congress, would hardly be a coup. Hell, I'd go so far as to even say it's their job and duty to refuse to follow it if it's illegality is evident enough. Such as, say, congress saying "no, we aren't authorizing military actions against Syria" and the President ordering the pentagon to attack anyway.
-
I'd like to know where this "congress didn't authorize Iraq / Afghanistan " myth came from, but I've heard it no less than 10 times in recent weeks
In any case, if the president asked congress for authorization, and they denied it, an he ordered a strike anyway... THAT would be the coup. The military obeying it would be the illegitimate government.
That said, and it won't make me friends here... I would obey.
Not because I want to go to Syria, but because if it came to a ground campaign, my soldiers would need me
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.pjmedia.com%2Finstapundit%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F09%2FOBAMAYOURERACIST2.jpg&hash=73910af39e6c5f49c06e53e6fbac78e370eaaad0)
-
I'd like to know where this "congress didn't authorize Iraq / Afghanistan " myth came from, but I've heard it no less than 10 times in recent weeks
In any case, if the president asked congress for authorization, and they denied it, an he ordered a strike anyway... THAT would be the coup. The military obeying it would be the illegitimate government.
That said, and it won't make me friends here... I would obey.
Not because I want to go to Syria, but because if it came to a ground campaign, my soldiers would need me
Valid reason. I'd say that any decision such as obey or not( in this situation vice a run the gas chambers sort of thing) is well above your or my paygrade. It's not all cocktail parties and powerpoint, some days you have to get out there and earn those four stars. 2 million E-1 to O-4 Shmuckatellis deciding whether or not to follow orders will serve no one except elements that don't need to be served. See Invergordon mutiny. Scratch that and you find commie labor agitators.
-
I wouldn't fault the boots on the ground and equipment dudes for following or not following such orders. That, some scenarios excluded, is something well above their heads.
But Generals and such? Not above their heads IMO.
-
Part of the crew, part of the ship.
-
Another thing to think about
The oath includes duty to the constitution, duty to the officers appointed over me, and to the president.
The oath is sort of "simon says" with the constitution standing in for simon.
If simon doesn't say, then the rest is moot.
-
Boehner...
What. The. *expletive deleted*ck.
-
Boehner...
What. The. *expletive deleted*.
When he was elected in 2010, he immediately quit talking about resetting the budget back to 2008 levels - and I haven't trusted him since.
It appears my mistrust is justified. :facepalm:
-
When he was elected in 2010, he immediately quit talking about resetting the budget back to 2008 levels - and I haven't trusted him since.
It appears my mistrust is justified. :facepalm:
Link? What's happened?
-
He said he'd go with Obama.
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/03/20308438-boehner-says-hell-back-obama-on-syria-strikes?lite
-
Absolute insanity :facepalm:
-
Surprise surprise
Sigh
-
Sarah Palin weighed in on the situation using Facebook:
So we’re bombing Syria because Syria is bombing Syria? And I'm the idiot?
Her posting was titled "LET ALLAH SORT IT OUT."
-
So can we formally declare the USA as a terrorist-supporting nation, since it's allying with Al-Qaeda?
-
So can we formally declare the USA as a terrorist-supporting nation, since it's allying with Al-Qaeda?
Works for me
-
So can we formally declare the USA as a terrorist-supporting nation, since it's allying with Al-Qaeda?
We (the US gov) are terrorists all right :mad:
I hope all the Eurosocialists who "voted" for the Peace President are happy :P
-
Boehner...
What. The. *expletive deleted*.
It is very easy to understand.
In addition to Saddam's chemical weapon stockpile, Syria has been keeping George Hamilton's lifetime stash of Man Tan (http://www.beautydepartment.com.au/product/man-tan) on ice. And Boehner wants it bad.
-
So can we formally declare the USA as a terrorist-supporting nation, since it's allying with Al-Qaeda?
We've been selling them guns since the 80's. Is killing their enemies for them really that much different?
-
When he was elected in 2010, he immediately quit talking about resetting the budget back to 2008 levels - and I haven't trusted him since.
It appears my mistrust is justified. :facepalm:
Boehner is a rino who plays a conservative on tv.
-
It is very easy to understand.
In addition to Saddam's chemical weapon stockpile, Syria has been keeping George Hamilton's lifetime stash of Man Tan (http://www.beautydepartment.com.au/product/man-tan) on ice. And Boehner wants it bad.
That is way too funny! :rofl: :rofl:
Therefore, it has to be true.
-
Um... <adjusts tinfoil headdress> One can only wonder, as we did with Roberts, what sort of leverage the NSA has provided El Presidente wrt Boehner, among other notable Warhawks.
-
Um... <adjusts tinfoil headdress> One can only wonder, as we did with Roberts, what sort of leverage the NSA has provided El Presidente wrt Boehner, among other notable Warhawks.
I was thinking the same thing - maybe pictures of him carousing with some railroad heiress ;)
-
Used to be that the saying was, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Now I guess it is, "The enemy of my enemy is my enemy."
-
We will treat our enemies as friends and our friends like enemies.
-
"Ya know, Louie, ya keep dat up, and yer enemies won't respect ya, and ya got no friends."
-
And McCain/Graham were making the rounds on the talk shows this morning. I just don't know how I can vote for a party that puts folks like that in leadership positions. These guys are Democrats through and through. They are only in the Republican party, I believe, as agent-provocateurs of the left wing of the Democratic party.
-
Boehner is a rino who plays a conservative on tv.
I hope his district toss his ass out in 2014. He is from a fairly conservative area.
-
Getting rid of another career politican would not bother me as long as he's replaced by a conservative.
Syria is a problem. I don't know what the answer is for the US, but I would stay home and let the combatants fight it out. The US looses no matter it does. Why bother? It is all about that "red line" and out president's "honor and credibility". The other stable middle eastern countries should be involved as the outcome really does affect them. The US just wants Israel safe and the oil to continue flowing.
-
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/03/us-syria-crisis-usa-kerry-idUSBRE9820ZR20130903 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/03/us-syria-crisis-usa-kerry-idUSBRE9820ZR20130903)
Looks like he was for it before he was against it again.
-
Hey! At least it's "not going to war in the traditional sense." ??? =| :O :facepalm: :'(
-
With the Russian assets in the area, how long will it be after the US starts hitting Syrian gov't targets that the Ruskies start hitting Syrian rebel targets...in the name of fairness, of course?......
-
With the Russian assets in the area, how long will it be after the US starts hitting Syrian gov't targets that the Ruskies start hitting Syrian rebel targets...in the name of fairness, of course?......
Well now there's a fun scenerio...
-
Win win
damn phone
-
Well now there's a fun scenerio...
BOTH sides eliminated? Sounds like a plan!
-
Scumbag McCain can't even be bothered to listen
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/obama-wins-boehner-support-syrian-military-strike-article-1.1444420
-
It's pretty clear by now that we are ruled by some sort of Republocratic cabal that totally ignores the (former) citizens.
-
Scumbag McCain can't even be bothered to listen
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/obama-wins-boehner-support-syrian-military-strike-article-1.1444420
He's already had his mind made up for months on this.
-
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/03/senate-resolution-syria-strike/2760615/
Oh, great. When "war" is just too much for the US to commit to, we get "90 day resolutions."
Anyone want to take a wager on whether such a 90 day resolution will turn into 900 days? 2900 days?
It's all the same thing, whether the Senate approves "war" or a "90 day resolution" allowing for 3 months of cruise missile strikes and aircraft sorties.
-
Scumbag McCain can't even be bothered to listen
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/obama-wins-boehner-support-syrian-military-strike-article-1.1444420
In 2006 the Senate unanimously voted to outlaw online poker. So a hypocrite as well as a warmonger.
-
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/03/senate-resolution-syria-strike/2760615/
Oh, great. When "war" is just too much for the US to commit to, we get "90 day resolutions."
Anyone want to take a wager on whether such a 90 day resolution will turn into 900 days? 2900 days?
It's all the same thing, whether the Senate approves "war" or a "90 day resolution" allowing for 3 months of cruise missile strikes and aircraft sorties.
Do you suppose that those we attack and their friends will adhere to this same 90 day limit? :facepalm:
-
Today on the radio they were discussing Harry Reid's resolution, which limits the action to either 60 or 90 days.
The resultion supposedly prohibits the use of "combat troops" on the ground.
Special ops personnel are not considered "combat troops!"
Is ANYONE paying ANY attention to what thes b@$t@rd$ are doing? :facepalm: :mad:
-
The USSA has become a "rogue state" =(
-
Upon reflection, I think the conspiracy theorists are correct. This colossal of a goat-screw HAS to be designed to diminish the influence of the U.S. on the world stage. I'm not even kidding.
-
Red lines for all!
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/04/obama-syria-red-line-chemical-weapons
-
When BHO and his foreign policy goobers talk, I imagine Yackety Sax background music.
-
*expletive deleted* it
Anything to accelerate the inevitable collapse is a good thing. That's my new position
I've been thinking about this a lot, and I see it (or similar sentiments) posted a lot. Here's my question though.
Given how bad the current situation is, and how supposedly intractable it is: what in the world makes you think that what came after a collapse would be better than this? history is not exactly rife with formerly great societies collapsing in on themselves and then coming out the other side better off. If we actually do get a currency or other collapse, the result will not be Anarcho-Capitalist utopia with machine guns, hookers, and heroin for all.
-
I hope his district toss his ass out in 2014. He is from a fairly conservative area.
Boehner represents my district. He usually runs unopposed aside from the occasional liberal Democrat clown.
-
If we actually do get a currency or other collapse, the result will not be Anarcho-Capitalist utopia with machine guns, hookers, and heroin for all.
My hope is similar to that of longeyes (where'd he get off to, anyways?).
Regionalized independence and autonomy. If I've got to leave the Southwest because it's gonna become LaRazaChispaMechaAztlan, then so be it. As long as I can pick somewhere that has individual liberty.
-
Upon reflection, I think the conspiracy theorists are correct. This colossal of a goat-screw HAS to be designed to diminish the influence of the U.S. on the world stage. I'm not even kidding.
I'd consider that a net positive. What has playing world police ever won us?
-
My hope is similar to that of longeyes (where'd he get off to, anyways?).
http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2013/01/fema-concentration-camps-locations-and-executive-orders-2447524.html
-
My hope is similar to that of longeyes (where'd he get off to, anyways?).
Regionalized independence and autonomy. If I've got to leave the Southwest because it's gonna become LaRazaChispaMechaAztlan, then so be it. As long as I can pick somewhere that has individual liberty.
Yeah, history isn't on your side for that one.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwesternrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F09%2Fkilling-syrians.jpg%3Fw%3D500%26amp%3Bh%3D490&hash=b1d910e3b2b83304f1cd1f673d47cfdd5de08f56)
-
Former USSR ??? =|
-
If we actually do get a currency or other collapse, the result will not be Anarcho-Capitalist utopia with machine guns, hookers, and heroin for all.
Quoted for the absolute truth, despite the Farnham's Freehold fantasists want to believe.
-
Yeah, history isn't on your side for that one.
Nor was it up to 1775. Millenia of subjugation and conquering, and we get 12 years of peace before COTUS, another 72 years until Lincoln proves Lysander Spooner true, and 150 years to bring us to today's gangster State.
Maybe we can get a reset on that 1775 decision, and take the left turn at Albequerque this time. ;)
-
Nor was it up to 1775. Millenia of subjugation and conquering, and we get 12 years of peace before COTUS, another 72 years until Lincoln proves Lysander Spooner true, and 150 years to bring us to today's gangster State.
Maybe we can get a reset on that 1775 decision, and take the left turn at Albequerque this time. ;)
Things started heading in the wrong direction long before lincoln. Actions by the first SCOTUS, Marshall specifically, eventually led up to the crap we are in today.
It only takes a few bad apples in the wrong place....
-
Boehner represents my district. He usually runs unopposed aside from the occasionally liberal Democrat clown.
What county do you live in? Butler?
-
Things started heading in the wrong direction long before lincoln. Actions by the first SCOTUS, Marshall specifically, eventually led up to the crap we are in today.
It only takes a few bad apples in the wrong place....
I peg the beginning of the downward spiral to the time George Washington used ~15,000 Federal troops as tax collectors.
-
Nor was it up to 1775. Millenia of subjugation and conquering, and we get 12 years of peace before COTUS, another 72 years until Lincoln proves Lysander Spooner true, and 150 years to bring us to today's gangster State.
Maybe we can get a reset on that 1775 decision, and take the left turn at Albequerque this time. ;)
I'm not convinced monarchy is as bad as it's made out to be.
Regardless, look at the people and circumstances that led to 1775. Look at the same circa 2013. Then watch the fantasy die.
-
Regardless, look at the people and circumstances that led to 1775. Look at the same circa 2013. Then watch the fantasy die.
1775: Tom Paine. Patrick Henry. Thomas Jefferson. James Madison. Alexander Hamilton. John Jay. And yes, George Washington.
2013: Mitt Romney. John McCain. Nancy Pelosi. Harry Reid. John Boehner. Lindsay Graham. And of course, Barack Hussein Obama.
:'(
-
What county do you live in? Butler?
Yes
-
Shades of *expletive deleted*ing Vietnam...
BHO isnt the black Jimmah Carter hes the black LBJ.
Vietnam started off with "limited involvement" and "only a few advisors and weapons shipments"
The RVN wasnt really much better to its people than the DRV
And it looks like the Cold War might be coming back.
Yeah this is gonna turn out *expletive deleted*ing awesome
-
I'm an idiot. I never realized that Delta, Special Forces, and similar didn't count as boots on the ground.
-
I'm an idiot. I never realized that Delta, Special Forces, and similar didn't count as boots on the ground.
They will be issued sneakers for the duration.
-
Majority of Americans support sending Congress to Syria. (http://www.theonion.com/articles/poll-majority-of-americans-approve-of-sending-cong,33752/)
In fact, 91 percent of those surveyed agreed that the active use of sarin gas attacks by the Syrian government would, if anything, only increase poll respondents’ desire to send Congress to Syria.
-
Yes
Small world...I live in Cheviot.
-
This just in...
Teh MSM has determined that breaking things and hurting people in Syria is nothing at all like our "unnecessary" "war of choice" in Iraq. Oh thank God! For a minute, I thought we might be about to eff up there.
Not surprisingly, our difficulty in gaining concurrence at home and abroad for our entry into the Syrian mess is because of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. Of course! It's so clear to me now. Why have I just now learned of this?
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/the-bush-burden/?ref=opinion
The mental and moral contortions the progressives must go thru in order to agree with Dear Leader are simply staggering. It's sooooooo rich to see video of Uncle Joe, threatening impeachment for unauthorized military adventures. It's soooooo sweet to read Dear Leader's comments on the floor of the Senate during W's effort to have the debt ceiling raised. It is so transparently hypocritical for our NYC-based chattering class to advocate for war in Syria. How do such people even sleep?
-
Here's why this is so interesting to the US and Russia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirkuk%E2%80%93Banias_pipeline
I can't find who holds the construction contract, but it wouldn't surprise me if the tension between the US and Russia over this issue is due to Russia getting the contract canceled in 2009 and a US firm or firms are now bidding for the contract. Hence our allegiance with the rebels, because the pipeline goes through their territory.
-
http://www.globalresearch.ca/oil-and-pipeline-geopolitics-the-us-nato-race-for-syrias-black-gold/5330216
The ‘”Free Syrian Army” has taken control of important oil fields in Deir Ezzor. Other fields, in the Rumeilan, are controlled by the Kurdish Democratic Union Party, who are also hostile to the “rebels” with whom they have repeatedly clashed.
The U.S. / NATO strategy focuses on helping rebels to seize the oil fields with a twofold purpose: to deprive the Syrian state of revenue from exports, already strongly decreased as a result of the EU embargo, and to ensure that the largest deposits pass in the future, through the “rebels” under the control of the big Western oil companies.
Fundamental to this end, is the control of the internal pipelines. This has been sabotaged by the “rebels” in several places, especially near Homs where there is one of two refineries in the country, to stop the supply of petroleum products. But there is something strategically more important at stake: Syria’s role as a hub of alternative energy corridors, through Turkey and other pathways, controlled by the U.S. and the European Union.
Also:
Even more dangerous for Western interests is the agreement signed in May 2011 between Damascus, Baghdad and Tehran: it involves the construction of a gas pipeline through Iraq, which will transport Iranian natural gas to Syria and from there to foreign markets.
It is not in US interests for Iranian exports to be facilitated through the Mediterranean.
-
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-77304650/ (http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-77304650/)
Once? Shame on you. 12 times? Shame on me.
-
No Blood For Oil! Except when the president is the Democrat Messiah, then opposing him is rrrrraaaacccccciiiiiissssssstttttttt
-
Colleagues, I am staunchly against striking Syria in support of "international norms". That should be clear before I pose the next question.
If Assad falls, and an AQ-backed faction takes control of Syria, including all stocks of CW/BW materiel, what ought to be or action then? Is this result any more likely to destabilize the ME than the current status quo? Syria, under the current regime, as far as we know, has not equipped Hezbollah with WMD, or at least, Hezbollah has yet to use them on Western/Israeli interests. Would a radical Islamist Syria be as reticent? If Syrian WMD were used on Israel, one could imagine a very violent counter strike by the IDF on Syrian, Lebanese, and/or Iranian strategic assets.
Again, my concern for this is based purely on US interests. I don't think those interests are served by radioactive clouds drifting across the region. It would destabilize domestic markets, and drive up the price of oil, dramatically.
So, what do all y'all think?
-
I think there are bad outcomes for the Syria situation regardless of who comes out on top. And we can count on the current occupant of the White House to do exactly the wrong thing regardless.
Might as well make peace with your dear and fluffy deity of choice, as we are all just along for the ride at this point.
-
If we attack now, we risk consequences now and in the future. If we don't, we may risk consequences in the future. Given that we have no clear objective, no clear beneficial result, and a constantly evolving plan, I say wait.
-
. . . And we can count on the current occupant of the White House to do exactly the wrong thing regardless . . .
Sadly, I have no counter to this assertion . . . =(
-
Colleagues, I am staunchly against striking Syria in support of "international norms". That should be clear before I pose the next question.
If Assad falls, and an AQ-backed faction takes control of Syria, including all stocks of CW/BW materiel, what ought to be or action then? Is this result any more likely to destabilize the ME than the current status quo? Syria, under the current regime, as far as we know, has not equipped Hezbollah with WMD, or at least, Hezbollah has yet to use them on Western/Israeli interests. Would a radical Islamist Syria be as reticent? If Syrian WMD were used on Israel, one could imagine a very violent counter strike by the IDF on Syrian, Lebanese, and/or Iranian strategic assets.
Again, my concern for this is based purely on US interests. I don't think those interests are served by radioactive clouds drifting across the region. It would destabilize domestic markets, and drive up the price of oil, dramatically.
So, what do all y'all think?
It is hard to see a radical Islamist / AQ backed faction controlling Syria - for a start, they would have to commit something close to genocide in order to get into power. Secondly, most of the regional powers - especially Israel and Iran - would have profound reasons to stop them getting close to that position (of controlling WMD), to say nothing of the US and Russia.
That said, the inane way that the West is acting over this means that nothing can be ruled out.
-
Well, I'm not going to hold my breath, but it could be that Benghazi is coming back to bite the administration in the ass regarding the Syria response. One can only hope. It would be awesome if Obama's Syria push both finally opens up the Benghazi closet and results in no US involvement in Syria.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/08/wh-push-for-syria-support-hurt-by-credibility-over-benghazi-one-year/
-
An interesting quote in a news article I read this morning:
Sun Tzu: “Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/09/sun-tzu-would-be-very-unhappy-with-obama-plans-for-syria-strike/?intcmp=HPBucket#ixzz2ePEZX900
It's exactly where Obama is. I've been thinking to myself over the last few days that he's handling this not like a President or Commander in Chief, but like a community organizer. He's constantly changing dialog and tactics willy nilly for politics and appearance, not to improve his strategy. He's "A leaf on the wind", but not in a good way.
-
An interesting quote in a news article I read this morning:
It's exactly where Obama is. I've been thinking to myself over the last few days that he's handling this not like a President or Commander in Chief, but like a community organizer. He's constantly changing dialog and tactics willy nilly for politics and appearance, not to improve his strategy. He's "A leaf on the wind", but not in a good way.
We're getting to know the Real Obama.
-
He's sending Susan "Benghazi was over a youtube video" Rice to lobby Congress. On the one year anniversary of Benghazi. At this point it's hard to believe he's not deliberately sabotaging this.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/09/09/white-house-to-send-susan-rice-to-lobby-congress-on-syria/
-
So, is it:
1. The automatic "out" of budget sequestering for the Pentagon that justifies this war? (McCain/Graham are for this one, I think)
2. The Banias-Kirkuk pipeline construction contract that justifies this war? (Other NeoCons support this one)
3. The denial of a Mediterranean oil terminal for Iranian oil exports that justifies this war? (Everyone scared of the Iranian bugbear would support this)
4. Assad's government using chem weapons that justifies this war?
5. The Syrian rebels using chem weapons that justifies this war?
6. Both sides using chem weapons that justifies this war?
7. The Syrian refugees here in the US, protesting FOR war so that US troops overthrow Assad for them (rather than supporting their own rebels), that justifies this war?
Or are there other reasons? I see none so far that justify any US involvement.
-
So, is it:
1. The automatic "out" of budget sequestering for the Pentagon that justifies this war? (McCain/Graham are for this one, I think)
2. The Banias-Kirkuk pipeline construction contract that justifies this war? (Other NeoCons support this one)
3. The denial of a Mediterranean oil terminal for Iranian oil exports that justifies this war? (Everyone scared of the Iranian bugbear would support this)
4. Assad's government using chem weapons that justifies this war?
5. The Syrian rebels using chem weapons that justifies this war?
6. Both sides using chem weapons that justifies this war?
7. The Syrian refugees here in the US, protesting FOR war so that US troops overthrow Assad for them (rather than supporting their own rebels), that justifies this war?
Or are there other reasons? I see none so far that justify any US involvement.
There are no reasons that justify our involvement
-
Whoa!
Fitz and Az agree on something??? ???
:rofl:
-
Ha, I just saw a headline that, "Kerry comment undermines Obama" and I thought it was this one about an "unbelievably small" response:
http://michellemalkin.com/2013/09/09/john-kerry-on-proposed-syria-attack-itll-be-unbelievably-small/
But instead it was this one:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/09/kerry-comment-could-undermine-obama-push-for-syria-strike/
It's almost like a sitcom at this point.
-
Keystone Kops, meet the Doofus Diplomats.
-
Charlie Rose's interview with Syrian President Bashar Assad is on right now. I watched about 10 or 15 minutes of it and had to leave before I shot the teevee.
There are *no* good guys here; the Syrian government and the rebels obviously, but also Obama & Co. for wanting to interfere unilaterally, and the U.N. for not doing anything.
-
The Middle East has been unsettled for centuries. Back nearly 800 years ago when the Tatar armies were approaching, the terrified Saracens sent an embassy to Britain (!) requesting aid against the invaders. Peter des Roches, an English bishop*, figured that interference would be both costly and futile, so he counseled the king: "Let the dogs devour one another and perish . . . "
He thought that Christendom could then move in and sweep up the remnants . . . didn't quite work out that way, but he was probably correct in that military intervention on behalf of the Saracens wouldn't have done much good for Britain either. Maybe our current leader community organizer should study history.
* - bishops back then were overtly involved in both military and political matters.
-
Kerry's 'unbelievably small attack' remark brought to mind only this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWBUl7oT9sA
-
* - bishops back then were overtly involved in both military and political matters.
Bishops were (and are) learned men and at the time were trusted advisors.
(And, to further go off on a tangent, Chrome thinks "Advisor" is a misspelling.)
-
Bishops were (and are) learned men and at the time were trusted advisors.
And at the time, among the VERY few learned men. Much more so than even a good portion of the nobility at many points. The church then (even more so than it seems now) above perhaps your average parish priest or monk, was very much about politics.
Oh and what seems to be the latest-
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/10/war-averted-syria-apparently-accepts-russias-proposal-to-turn-over-chemical-weapons/
Funny how fast that plan came together, innit?
-
Does Obama send Putin a thank you card?
-
And at the time, among the VERY few learned men. Much more so than even a good portion of the nobility at many points. The church then (even more so than it seems now) above perhaps your average parish priest or monk, was very much about politics.
Indeed, religion was some way behind politics, gaining power and making money to most of the upper Church hierarchy during the Middle Ages - as the likes of of Wycliffe, Huss and Luther pointed out.
-
Does Obama send Putin a thank you card?
If that what you wanna call it :laugh:
-
Funny how fast that plan came together, innit?
Giving O and P the benefit the doubt here...
What if they were playing "good cop and bad cop" with Syria with O being the "bad cop". Think about it, we already have a history of going into countries and breaking their stuff, so Assad had to know there was at least some chance of it happening again. That was the stick. Russia, after starting off with a strong objection, the slowly softening, comes up with a plan that gets rid of the weapons, but keeps Assad from being attacked. At that point, it has to seem like a great idea.
Do you think Assad would have agreed to the Russian initiative at the start of all this? I don't. A risky ploy, but if intentional, it worked quite well.
If not intentional, well, we got lucky.
Chris
-
If not intentional, well, we got lucky.
I'm putin my money on lucky ;)
-
I'm putin my money on lucky ;)
This. Obama and Kerry being smart and adroit enough to concoct this scheme pegs my incredulity meter way past the red line...
If they were, they wouldn't have stepped into this box in the first place.
-
This. Obama and Kerry being smart and adroit enough to concoct this scheme pegs my incredulity meter way past the red line...
If they were, they wouldn't have stepped into this box in the first place.
Yeah, if it was orchestrated as good cop bad cop, Obama would have to have waffled WAY less. Bad cop to me would be us saying "We're gonna von Clausewitz your ass", with Putin coming in with a moderate proposal. Instead, we kept emphasizing how little we would do or maybe even not do, we'll have to discuss it to make sure we're inclusive and address everyone's needs, which actually to me, made Putin's option actually look more like the tough guy bad cop.
Of course I was just perusing MSNBC and the comments there point out that this was a "masterpiece maneuver" by Obama.
-
Maybe what we just witnessed is what 100 years ago was called a minstrel show
-
Smart Power: In Stark Reversal, Obama Embraces Putin Plan...Which Putin Promptly Rejects[/u]
I can't say I envy Obama's speechwriters. First, they were instructed to draw up a "case for war" speech. Then that got scrapped, in favor of a "diplomatic breakthrough" face-saving address, replete with empty tough-guy language. Now what? Obama's Syria policy is changing by the hour.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/09/10/smart-power-obama-pulls-syria-180-fully-embraces-putin-solution-n1696295
I can't say if this is true or not but if it is we sure do live in interesting times ...
-
Smart Power: In Stark Reversal, Obama Embraces Putin Plan...Which Putin Promptly Rejects[/u]
I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg716.imageshack.us%2Fimg716%2F4057%2F3eyl.jpg&hash=954e3695d0db050aa3284ee7e0e77cffca76a783) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/716/3eyl.jpg/)
-
Smart Power: In Stark Reversal, Obama Embraces Putin Plan...Which Putin Promptly Rejects[/u]
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/09/10/smart-power-obama-pulls-syria-180-fully-embraces-putin-solution-n1696295
I can't say if this is true or not but if it is we sure do live in interesting times ...
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Did anyone besides Kerry and Obama actually think that they had a deal with Putin?
Obama is playing checkers strategy against a chess master.
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Did anyone besides Kerry and Obama actually think that they had a deal with Putin?
Obama is playing checkers strategy against a chess master.
Chess, perhaps being symbolic of western imperialism, must not have been included on the community organizer curriculum track...
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Did anyone besides Kerry and Obama actually think that they had a deal with Putin?
Obama is playing checkers dominoes strategy against a chess master.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2F5a031040104cca312fe9541fb897c598%2Ftumblr_mgsildWJZB1s2gm4xo1_400.gif&hash=f3292b2132f984c87f5c0cf3633e7b8d8635d9ef)
-
Well tonight's speech should be "interesting". I wouldn't be surprised to see this from Obama.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0
-
Y'know, Kerry was right.
This IS an unbelievably small response.
-
Stephen Green's drunkblog of the speech. Just start at the bottom and scroll UP:
http://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2013/09/10/drunkblogging-tsyria/
He stumbled on the word “unshakable.”
If you were looking for the telling detail, there you go.
The blameshifting didn’t occur until the eight minute mark, so I lost a bet.
But BOOOOOOOOOSH.
You hate Syria because of BOOOOOOSH!
I ended wars and now you won’t let me start one.
BOOOOOOOOSH.
I’m physically ill.
-
I don't know if this has been reported here, yet.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/wall-street-journal-elizabeth-obagy-fired-96637.html
-
I don't know if this has been reported here, yet.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/wall-street-journal-elizabeth-obagy-fired-96637.html
Yea, Rush Limbaugh just reported it! ;)
-
I don't know if this has been reported here, yet.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/wall-street-journal-elizabeth-obagy-fired-96637.html
“In addition to her role at the Institute for the Study of War, Ms. O’Bagy is affiliated with the Syrian Emergency Task Force, a nonprofit operating as a 501(c)(3) pending IRS approval that subcontracts with the U.S. and British governments to provide aid to the Syrian opposition,” the WSJ added in its clarification.
I wonder if the IRA or Al Qaeda can register for tax-exempt status here in the US, also? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
And even if they deny the 501c3 status... they still tacitly endorse the existence of such an organization by not revoking its incorporation charters and stomping it out of existence.
Once again, the State is a sponsor of terrorism. ;/ :'(
-
Who will provide aid to the US opposition ???
-
Something the majority of Americans approve of: Sending Congress to Syria. (http://www.theonion.com/articles/poll-majority-of-americans-approve-of-sending-cong,33752/)
-
Something the majority of Americans approve of: Sending Congress to Syria. (http://www.theonion.com/articles/poll-majority-of-americans-approve-of-sending-cong,33752/)
That's been posted at least twice now.
It gets funnier as this spirals down.
Lets imagine that Syria agrees to this. Who goes in to take care of the juice? The US? Ha! So the soviets land in Latakia. They start "dismantling" weapons. Suddenly there's a rebel "attack" and there's a pile of dead russkies. What happens, exactly?
And we just invited vlad to do it.
-
"Obama's "calculus" turns out to be a big steaming natural log."
https://twitter.com/iowahawkblog/status/378136174658740224
-
Some spot on comments on Obama's "I have urgent message, I need Congress to hold off on voting "No" on my use of force resolution."
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2663278477001/krauthammer-responds-to-obamas-speech/
(Ummm, Vietnam anyone?)
Especially this:
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2663460205001/091013krauthammer2141/
-
Hmmm, A "rush to war" Mr. President?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/11/us-cant-prove-bashar-assad-approved-chemical-attac/
-
Smart Power: In Stark Reversal, Obama Embraces Putin Plan...Which Putin Promptly Rejects[/u]
I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further.
http://news.yahoo.com/assad-syria-fulfil-chemical-weapons-initiative-u-ends-155433528.html
"When we see the United States really wants stability in our region and stops threatening, striving to attack, and also ceases arms deliveries to terrorists, then we will believe that the necessary processes can be finalized," he was quoted as saying in an interview with Russian state television.
I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further.
When negotiating with a fool, keep upping the ante.
-
Satire or reality?
http://www.theonion.com/articles/john-kerry-costs-us-defense-industry-400-billion,33815/
-
We're going to war.
Assad gave an ultimatum to Obama, to stop arming the rebels Al Qaeda.
The gears of State are already in motion to continue arming the rebels. Obama can't reverse that... it's too clearly already in motion.
Obama will reichstag us. Have a destroyer sunk due to sloppy defensive tactics, or something.
-
Well, at least we won't have to worry about the Russians storming through the Fulda Gap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulda_gap) as was the theme of many a WWIII books after clashes between US and Russia over "some damn fool thing in the Middle East."
-
This cartoon pretty much sums it up:
(https://sphotos-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/1229840_4801094524463_1974156201_n.jpg)
-
can someone get me a fix on whether the claims contained herein are true?
‘A large fleet named “Mol Comfort” carrying Arms for FSA from the U.S. has crashed in the Indian Ocean as it made its way from Singapore to Jeddah, on board were 4,500 containers loaded with arms for the Syrian rebels’
Something about the phrasing makes me suspicious
the pictures look real but conspiracy nuts are famous for taking pictures out of context and adding things for flavor
-
The MOL Comfort (a container ship, not a fleet) broke up and sank in the Indian Ocean during rough weather this June. She was indeed heading from Singapore to Saudi Arabia.
Beyond that..... there is no evidence that I am aware of that it was anything other then structural failure due to bad weather. The pictures, and the fact that she remained afloat for dang near a month, would lead me to doubt the torpedo theory circulating online. As to what was in the containers? Davey Jones only knows.
Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOL_Comfort
-
I'm now convinced that Putin/Assad are trolling the Obama/Kerry/Boehner fools hard.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html?ref=opinion
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/13/tag-team-assad-joins-putin-in-pressing-obama-to-drop-syria-strike-threat/
-
From the Duffle Blog:
http://www.duffelblog.com/2013/09/visit-bashar/
A Visit From Bashar:
Twas the day after gassing, when throughout the White House
No one’s courage was showing, not as big as a mouse;
The Nobel was hung by the chimney with care,
In hopes that a second soon would be there;
The Syrians were nestled all snug in their graves,
While the President dithered and ranted and raved.
And Kerry in a lather, Hagel a bind,
Both wondered if it were time to resign.
When from the West Wing there arose such a clatter,
That the President’s aides all had to scatter.
Away to the UN they flew like a flash,
Away to the Congress, permission to ask.
“A very red line has now been severed,
The Tomahawks now must be delivered!
Or maybe a letter, quite strongly worded!
The decision has me quite disconcerted.
Perhaps the line was just pinkish instead.
Perhaps all the outrage is just in my head?”
More rapid than eagles his soldiers they came,
And told him that helping al Qaeda was lame.
“Now! Hollande, now! Merkel, now! Cameron of Britain,
“On! Aussies, on! Kiwis, and help us to get him!
“To Damascus, Aleppo! To the Heights at Golan!
“A measured response must surely go on!”
As dry leaves that before the desert wind fly,
The allies’ response made the President sigh;
And then from New York, the United Nations,
“Attacking Assad is not really your station.”
So up to the media the handlers they flew,
With the speech full of threats — and some promises too:
And then in a lather, and then in a calm,
And then with a letter, and then with a bomb,
The President wavered, and then lost his calm.
From his enemy’s Facebook now again came,
A taunt! A taunt! And it gave him great pain!
Assad dressed all in glory, from head to his foot,
With Vladimir Putin very jealous to boot;
Launching shell after shell like a wolf on the flock,
While Assad laughed like a madman and fondled his cock:
His eyes — how they twinkled! His dimples: how manic,
His cheeks glowed like roses, as the President panicked;
Assad’s artillery, drawn up like a bow,
With faces of dead children, white as the snow;
The stump of one child he held tight in his teeth,
While the smoke encircled Syria just like a wreath.
And the President puzzled three hours or more,
Puzzled and puzzled ’til his puzzler was sore.
Then the CINC thought of something he hadn’t before!
“Maybe peace,” he thought, “doesn’t come from a bomb.”
“Maybe peace…perhaps…means responding with calm!”
And what happened then? Well … in the West Wing they say,
That the President’s testes shrank three sizes that day!
Read more: http://www.duffelblog.com
-
Mother Mary and Jesus, it's "The Onion in real life" again. Obama has the nerve to claim that Congress is more concerned "with style over substance" regarding a Syria response. All the while, he's the one who has been 100% dedicated to making statements he thinks people want to hear and that make him look good versus making tactical decisions. Gotta give hos spin machine credit I guess...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/15/obama-defends-syria-policy-says-washington-too-style-conscious/
-
Mother Mary and Jesus, it's "The Onion in real life" again. Obama has the nerve to claim that Congress is more concerned "with style over substance" regarding a Syria response. All the while, he's the one who has been 100% dedicated to making statements he thinks people want to hear and that make him look good versus making tactical decisions. Gotta give hos spin machine credit I guess...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/15/obama-defends-syria-policy-says-washington-too-style-conscious/
Projection ;/
-
(https://scontent-b-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/v/1371296_10200742551710169_862127117_n.jpg?oh=81a0d10bb29e907f1064c0dd4c90c5b8&oe=523D00C5)
-
So in lieu of doing anything that, you know, actually needed doing this morning I watched a few videos of the FSA in action. Needless to say those boys don't know how to shoot.
I suggested to an acquaintance that we solve the problem simply by dropping off a palette of Magpul Dynamics videos somewhere convenient and then let the problem sort itself out. I was then informed that those videos are covered by ITAR.
Not that it's stopped them before...
-
A) They are mostly shooting AK's (Accuracy?!?! What's that??)
B) Aiming is against Islam. IIRC they cannot willingly take the life of another Muslim. So they shoot a bunch of bullets over that way and if someone gets hit, well Insha'Allah.
Someone who has more time in the Sandbox can correct me. We only had one Saudi officer in my MPOB class and that was how he explained it to us.
-
A) They are mostly shooting AK's (Accuracy?!?! What's that??)
B) Aiming is against Islam. IIRC they cannot willingly take the life of another Muslim. So they shoot a bunch of bullets over that way and if someone gets hit, well Insha'Allah.
Someone who has more time in the Sandbox can correct me. We only had one Saudi officer in my MPOB class and that was how he explained it to us.
Sounds like Brits from 250 years ago. Just too ungentlemanly to deliberately pick a target on the battlefield and single him out to kill him. Unsporting, don't you know?
In regards to A), to be fair they have been trained to fight against Americans. If you show an American soldier so much as a toenail, he'll try and find a way to hit it. 2-3 seconds of exposure to line up a proper shot is also enough time to get splatted, and you're exposing your face and part of your torso to do that.
-
A) They are mostly shooting AK's (Accuracy?!?! What's that??)
B) Aiming is against Islam. IIRC they cannot willingly take the life of another Muslim. So they shoot a bunch of bullets over that way and if someone gets hit, well Insha'Allah.
Someone who has more time in the Sandbox can correct me. We only had one Saudi officer in my MPOB class and that was how he explained it to us.
The Iraqis and Afghans didn't get that memo. I'd believe it's more likely they have neither the money nor the inclination for good training and you got an excuse.