|
U.S. Launches Missiles at Syrian Base After Chemical Weapons Attack
|
|
Topic Started: Apr 6 2017, 09:20 PM (2,633 Views)
|
|
nNeo
|
Apr 8 2017, 12:55 PM
Post #181
|
|
- Posts:
- 2,849
- Group:
- Global Moderators
- Member
- #16
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- jake58
- Apr 8 2017, 12:43 PM
I mentioned Islam was about 500 years behind earlier.
Or 80. The holocaust for example.
- jake58
- Apr 8 2017, 12:43 PM
other than H4T? not that many, really...
Thank goodness.
Edited by nNeo, Apr 8 2017, 12:57 PM.
|
|
“Strong people don’t need strong leaders.”
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 8 2017, 04:19 PM
Post #182
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,395
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:05 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
The Middle East is a lost cause.
I have friends and family there, and from there, so it's hard for me to agree with that, but you are right that there appears to be no stable configuration without a strong occupying power for the foreseeable future. I don't think America or the international community wants to take on that task. Siberian has a pretty good take on the Russian - US chess game. I made up a half-kidding conspiracy theory that's probably pretty close to truth -- we're horse trading Russia's port, our oil interests, future bases and trade deals, acceptance of Russian control of Ukraine while making it clear things west of that are not up for grabs -- this is all bargaining. I'm sure neither Russia or the US wants direct war. We can exchange a few token shots in the middle east, see how the new missiles work, pretend we care about gas attacks or rule of law, and pad up military spending as Robert suggested. No one is really hand-wringing about the Syrian people, sadly. That's really not a good argument for our continued involvement in the ME.
|
|
|
| |
|
Robert Stout
|
Apr 8 2017, 04:46 PM
Post #183
|
|
- Posts:
- 27,160
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #112
- Joined:
- Mar 22, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 04:19 PM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:05 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
The Middle East is a lost cause.
I have friends and family there, and from there, so it's hard for me to agree with that, but you are right that there appears to be no stable configuration without a strong occupying power for the foreseeable future. I don't think America or the international community wants to take on that task. Siberian has a pretty good take on the Russian - US chess game. I made up a half-kidding conspiracy theory that's probably pretty close to truth -- we're horse trading Russia's port, our oil interests, future bases and trade deals, acceptance of Russian control of Ukraine while making it clear things west of that are not up for grabs -- this is all bargaining. I'm sure neither Russia or the US wants direct war. We can exchange a few token shots in the middle east, see how the new missiles work, pretend we care about gas attacks or rule of law, and pad up military spending as Robert suggested. No one is really hand-wringing about the Syrian people, sadly.
That's really not a good argument for our continued involvement in the ME. Good point...Why are we there ???...Our contribution appears to be to kill people because they kill people...Perhaps we should send more ammo to all sides to settle the matter....The civil war in Syria has lasted so long only because of outside interference................ :oyvey
|
|
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
|
| |
|
Robertr2000
|
Apr 8 2017, 04:49 PM
Post #184
|
|
- Posts:
- 12,359
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #43
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Tsalagi
- Apr 7 2017, 03:46 PM
- estonianman
- Apr 7 2017, 03:36 PM
- Tsalagi
- Apr 7 2017, 03:31 PM
I get all warm and fuzzy when you come up with a new conspiracy there Robert..
Robert is correct - all you have to do is look at who benefits.
And all wrapped up nice and pretty without so much as a shred of evidence....how does he do that? Hey..do you think he knows where they buried Jimmy Hoffa?...No.no...I get it, who Jack the Ripper really was? Not a shred of evidence was produced before they said "Assad did it". Assad has no motive to do this. Just like in 2013 when he was blamed and facts showed that the "moderate" rebels were behind it.
|
|
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
|
| |
|
jake58
|
Apr 8 2017, 04:50 PM
Post #185
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,338
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #47
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:55 PM
- jake58
- Apr 8 2017, 12:43 PM
I mentioned Islam was about 500 years behind earlier.
Or 80. The holocaust for example. - jake58
- Apr 8 2017, 12:43 PM
other than H4T? not that many, really...
Thank goodness. Or 80. The holocaust for example.
Interesting counter... not really done in the name of religion tho. Currently, we have foot soldiers hijacking trucks and driving into the biggest crowds they can find to maximize the mayhem. Hitler had specific targets and went about eliminating them systematically. I'd have to think more about the parallels.
|
|
That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens
|
| |
|
Robertr2000
|
Apr 8 2017, 04:55 PM
Post #186
|
|
- Posts:
- 12,359
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #43
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:14 AM
- Harambe4Trump
- Apr 8 2017, 12:12 AM
They hate us because we are weak and ready to die.
They don't give a damn what we do here. It's what we do there. Again, not justifying it, but bombing country after country and overthrowing governments as it suits us has repercussions. Just so we're clear, you're against going into Syria then.
|
|
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 8 2017, 05:05 PM
Post #187
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,395
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Robert Stout
- Apr 8 2017, 04:46 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 04:19 PM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:05 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
The Middle East is a lost cause.
I have friends and family there, and from there, so it's hard for me to agree with that, but you are right that there appears to be no stable configuration without a strong occupying power for the foreseeable future. I don't think America or the international community wants to take on that task. Siberian has a pretty good take on the Russian - US chess game. I made up a half-kidding conspiracy theory that's probably pretty close to truth -- we're horse trading Russia's port, our oil interests, future bases and trade deals, acceptance of Russian control of Ukraine while making it clear things west of that are not up for grabs -- this is all bargaining. I'm sure neither Russia or the US wants direct war. We can exchange a few token shots in the middle east, see how the new missiles work, pretend we care about gas attacks or rule of law, and pad up military spending as Robert suggested. No one is really hand-wringing about the Syrian people, sadly.
That's really not a good argument for our continued involvement in the ME.
Good point...Why are we there ???...Our contribution appears to be to kill people because they kill people...Perhaps we should send more ammo to all sides to settle the matter....The civil war in Syria has lasted so long only because of outside interference................ :oyvey It gives me pause, but on this topic Mr. Stout and I appear to be in agreement.
Chilling. Really chilling.
|
|
|
| |
|
jake58
|
Apr 8 2017, 05:17 PM
Post #188
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,338
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #47
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Robertr2000
- Apr 8 2017, 04:55 PM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:14 AM
- Harambe4Trump
- Apr 8 2017, 12:12 AM
They hate us because we are weak and ready to die.
They don't give a damn what we do here. It's what we do there. Again, not justifying it, but bombing country after country and overthrowing governments as it suits us has repercussions. Just so we're clear, you're against going into Syria then. You don't really pay attention do you?
|
|
That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens
|
| |
|
Robertr2000
|
Apr 8 2017, 07:04 PM
Post #189
|
|
- Posts:
- 12,359
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #43
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- jake58
- Apr 8 2017, 05:17 PM
- Robertr2000
- Apr 8 2017, 04:55 PM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:14 AM
- Harambe4Trump
- Apr 8 2017, 12:12 AM
They hate us because we are weak and ready to die.
They don't give a damn what we do here. It's what we do there. Again, not justifying it, but bombing country after country and overthrowing governments as it suits us has repercussions. Just so we're clear, you're against going into Syria then.
You don't really pay attention do you? How about you stay out of my question to Neo.
|
|
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
|
| |
|
Siberian
|
Apr 8 2017, 07:26 PM
Post #190
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #136
- Joined:
- Mar 26, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:37 AM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 12:27 AM
We've been dabbling directly in the Middle East for two Presidential administrations now, and have nothing of lasting value to show for it. It's way past time for us to wash our hands of the whole thing and walk away.
Except now it's much harder to do. So much has been destabilized there's more risk to just walking away. It's funny that the people who were accusing me of being a traitor for opposing the invasion of Iraq are now all jumping on the bandwagon -- not meaning you -- I know you've had that view for a while.
I'm not seeing any scenario where our staying makes things better for any longer than the moment we leave. We're going to have to leave eventually and we're not willing, or perhaps even able, to invest the time and resources that would be necessary to establish an interim government so that an adequate peace could be established so that we could educate the people out of their sectarian hatreds and tribal divides. And even if we could, they'd fight us every step of the way because it would just be, to their eyes at least, another case of the Christian European white man attempting to impose his culture on a people who don't want it. So the question to my mind isn't, do we leave the Middle East to fend for itself even though it is a very unstable and dangerous situation, but rather how many resources and American lives do we expend before we leave the Middle East to fend for itself regardless of how unstable and dangerous the situation? We can exhaust ourselves trying to salvage an unsalvageable situation, or can leave now and use the resources that we would have wasted to accomplish something of true merit. It's really that simple. The Middle East is a lost cause. Oh, and after billions invested into arming of jihadusts and 6 years of "Assad must go" - the US is leaving Russians to clear the mess...  Besides, Putin was dreaming so much of a joint effort to fight ISIS, hand in hand... 
We have an anecdote - a surgeon is making a surgical operation, then stops, thinks for a while and with words "Damn, this was a big mistake, this one is spoiled, I'll start with another one - cuts the patient multiple times with a sculpel in a cross way...
|
|
Goood morning GULAG!!!
|
| |
|
Siberian
|
Apr 8 2017, 07:31 PM
Post #191
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #136
- Joined:
- Mar 26, 2016
|
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 11:54 AM
- jake58
- Apr 8 2017, 08:12 AM
They hate everyone who's not like them, even other Muslims who believe in a marginally different Allah. They're trying to take over the ME and attacking us is the best way to show they have the muscle to do it.
Which is not much different than the wars that ravaged Europe for centuries is it? Tribalism. "MY people are better and should control ____" There are people in the US who think only their people should be allowed in America because "my superior white DNA" Never mind, Jake is a person of rarely low culture, a xenophob and generally - what word did Clinton use - garbage? whatever he says bad of others - is something said by soneobe below of someone above.
|
|
Goood morning GULAG!!!
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 8 2017, 07:34 PM
Post #192
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,395
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Siberian
- Apr 8 2017, 07:26 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:37 AM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 12:27 AM
We've been dabbling directly in the Middle East for two Presidential administrations now, and have nothing of lasting value to show for it. It's way past time for us to wash our hands of the whole thing and walk away.
Except now it's much harder to do. So much has been destabilized there's more risk to just walking away. It's funny that the people who were accusing me of being a traitor for opposing the invasion of Iraq are now all jumping on the bandwagon -- not meaning you -- I know you've had that view for a while.
I'm not seeing any scenario where our staying makes things better for any longer than the moment we leave. We're going to have to leave eventually and we're not willing, or perhaps even able, to invest the time and resources that would be necessary to establish an interim government so that an adequate peace could be established so that we could educate the people out of their sectarian hatreds and tribal divides. And even if we could, they'd fight us every step of the way because it would just be, to their eyes at least, another case of the Christian European white man attempting to impose his culture on a people who don't want it. So the question to my mind isn't, do we leave the Middle East to fend for itself even though it is a very unstable and dangerous situation, but rather how many resources and American lives do we expend before we leave the Middle East to fend for itself regardless of how unstable and dangerous the situation? We can exhaust ourselves trying to salvage an unsalvageable situation, or can leave now and use the resources that we would have wasted to accomplish something of true merit. It's really that simple. The Middle East is a lost cause.
Oh, and after billions invested into arming of jihadusts and 6 years of "Assad must go" - the US is leaving Russians to clear the mess...  Besides, Putin was dreaming so much of a joint effort to fight ISIS, hand in hand...  We have an anecdote - a surgeon is making a surgical operation, then stops, thinks for a while and with words "Damn, this was a big mistake, this one is spoiled, I'll start with another one - cuts the patient multiple times with a sculpel in a cross way...  The Russians won't be cleaning up Jack shiat. The Russians will support Assad just enough so that he manages to reestablish tentative control over the majority of his territory, and they'll call the job done. They have no interest in anything other than keeping their client state propped up and access to a deep water port they wouldn't have otherwise.
Propping up a strong arm military dictator such as Assad will not "stabilize" the ME. All it does is push the chaos down the road for another five to twenty years.
|
|
|
| |
|
Robertr2000
|
Apr 8 2017, 07:43 PM
Post #193
|
|
- Posts:
- 12,359
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #43
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 07:34 PM
- Siberian
- Apr 8 2017, 07:26 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:37 AM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 12:27 AM
We've been dabbling directly in the Middle East for two Presidential administrations now, and have nothing of lasting value to show for it. It's way past time for us to wash our hands of the whole thing and walk away.
Except now it's much harder to do. So much has been destabilized there's more risk to just walking away. It's funny that the people who were accusing me of being a traitor for opposing the invasion of Iraq are now all jumping on the bandwagon -- not meaning you -- I know you've had that view for a while.
I'm not seeing any scenario where our staying makes things better for any longer than the moment we leave. We're going to have to leave eventually and we're not willing, or perhaps even able, to invest the time and resources that would be necessary to establish an interim government so that an adequate peace could be established so that we could educate the people out of their sectarian hatreds and tribal divides. And even if we could, they'd fight us every step of the way because it would just be, to their eyes at least, another case of the Christian European white man attempting to impose his culture on a people who don't want it. So the question to my mind isn't, do we leave the Middle East to fend for itself even though it is a very unstable and dangerous situation, but rather how many resources and American lives do we expend before we leave the Middle East to fend for itself regardless of how unstable and dangerous the situation? We can exhaust ourselves trying to salvage an unsalvageable situation, or can leave now and use the resources that we would have wasted to accomplish something of true merit. It's really that simple. The Middle East is a lost cause.
Oh, and after billions invested into arming of jihadusts and 6 years of "Assad must go" - the US is leaving Russians to clear the mess...  Besides, Putin was dreaming so much of a joint effort to fight ISIS, hand in hand...  We have an anecdote - a surgeon is making a surgical operation, then stops, thinks for a while and with words "Damn, this was a big mistake, this one is spoiled, I'll start with another one - cuts the patient multiple times with a sculpel in a cross way... 
The Russians won't be cleaning up Jack shiat. The Russians will support Assad just enough so that he manages to reestablish tentative control over the majority of his territory, and they'll call the job done. They have no interest in anything other than keeping their client state propped up and access to a deep water port they wouldn't have otherwise. Propping up a strong arm military dictator such as Assad will not "stabilize" the ME. All it does is push the chaos down the road for another five to twenty years. Taking out Assad and enabling ISIS is stabilizing how?
|
|
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
|
| |
|
Siberian
|
Apr 8 2017, 07:48 PM
Post #194
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #136
- Joined:
- Mar 26, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 07:34 PM
- Siberian
- Apr 8 2017, 07:26 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:37 AM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 12:27 AM
We've been dabbling directly in the Middle East for two Presidential administrations now, and have nothing of lasting value to show for it. It's way past time for us to wash our hands of the whole thing and walk away.
Except now it's much harder to do. So much has been destabilized there's more risk to just walking away. It's funny that the people who were accusing me of being a traitor for opposing the invasion of Iraq are now all jumping on the bandwagon -- not meaning you -- I know you've had that view for a while.
I'm not seeing any scenario where our staying makes things better for any longer than the moment we leave. We're going to have to leave eventually and we're not willing, or perhaps even able, to invest the time and resources that would be necessary to establish an interim government so that an adequate peace could be established so that we could educate the people out of their sectarian hatreds and tribal divides. And even if we could, they'd fight us every step of the way because it would just be, to their eyes at least, another case of the Christian European white man attempting to impose his culture on a people who don't want it. So the question to my mind isn't, do we leave the Middle East to fend for itself even though it is a very unstable and dangerous situation, but rather how many resources and American lives do we expend before we leave the Middle East to fend for itself regardless of how unstable and dangerous the situation? We can exhaust ourselves trying to salvage an unsalvageable situation, or can leave now and use the resources that we would have wasted to accomplish something of true merit. It's really that simple. The Middle East is a lost cause.
Oh, and after billions invested into arming of jihadusts and 6 years of "Assad must go" - the US is leaving Russians to clear the mess...  Besides, Putin was dreaming so much of a joint effort to fight ISIS, hand in hand...  We have an anecdote - a surgeon is making a surgical operation, then stops, thinks for a while and with words "Damn, this was a big mistake, this one is spoiled, I'll start with another one - cuts the patient multiple times with a sculpel in a cross way... 
The Russians won't be cleaning up Jack shiat. The Russians will support Assad just enough so that he manages to reestablish tentative control over the majority of his territory, and they'll call the job done. They have no interest in anything other than keeping their client state propped up and access to a deep water port they wouldn't have otherwise. Propping up a strong arm military dictator such as Assad will not "stabilize" the ME. All it does is push the chaos down the road for another five to twenty years. it stabilized Egypt, at least for quite a long period, the only difference between As-Sissi and Assad is that As-Sissi is "our son of a bitch" for the US. No, it won't be that simple, now after Syrian war became a part of mini Middle Eastern World War - only peace between Iran and Saudia may stopnthe war in Syria. Unfortunately Syrian war will go on for many more years, I'm afraid, if not one of major sides invests huge effort, money, everything into desisive victory. Which is still hardly achievable. Anyway, if the US leaves Syria right now - ISIS will be revived by Saudia immediately, and many more 9/11 will be just a matter of time.
|
|
Goood morning GULAG!!!
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 8 2017, 09:04 PM
Post #195
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,395
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Robertr2000
- Apr 8 2017, 07:43 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 07:34 PM
- Siberian
- Apr 8 2017, 07:26 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:37 AM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I'm not seeing any scenario where our staying makes things better for any longer than the moment we leave. We're going to have to leave eventually and we're not willing, or perhaps even able, to invest the time and resources that would be necessary to establish an interim government so that an adequate peace could be established so that we could educate the people out of their sectarian hatreds and tribal divides. And even if we could, they'd fight us every step of the way because it would just be, to their eyes at least, another case of the Christian European white man attempting to impose his culture on a people who don't want it. So the question to my mind isn't, do we leave the Middle East to fend for itself even though it is a very unstable and dangerous situation, but rather how many resources and American lives do we expend before we leave the Middle East to fend for itself regardless of how unstable and dangerous the situation? We can exhaust ourselves trying to salvage an unsalvageable situation, or can leave now and use the resources that we would have wasted to accomplish something of true merit. It's really that simple. The Middle East is a lost cause.
Oh, and after billions invested into arming of jihadusts and 6 years of "Assad must go" - the US is leaving Russians to clear the mess...  Besides, Putin was dreaming so much of a joint effort to fight ISIS, hand in hand...  We have an anecdote - a surgeon is making a surgical operation, then stops, thinks for a while and with words "Damn, this was a big mistake, this one is spoiled, I'll start with another one - cuts the patient multiple times with a sculpel in a cross way... 
The Russians won't be cleaning up Jack shiat. The Russians will support Assad just enough so that he manages to reestablish tentative control over the majority of his territory, and they'll call the job done. They have no interest in anything other than keeping their client state propped up and access to a deep water port they wouldn't have otherwise. Propping up a strong arm military dictator such as Assad will not "stabilize" the ME. All it does is push the chaos down the road for another five to twenty years. Taking out Assad and enabling ISIS is stabilizing how? I didn't say that taking out Assad and enabling the ISIS is stabilizing.
|
|
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 8 2017, 09:07 PM
Post #196
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,395
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Siberian
- Apr 8 2017, 07:48 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 07:34 PM
- Siberian
- Apr 8 2017, 07:26 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:37 AM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I'm not seeing any scenario where our staying makes things better for any longer than the moment we leave. We're going to have to leave eventually and we're not willing, or perhaps even able, to invest the time and resources that would be necessary to establish an interim government so that an adequate peace could be established so that we could educate the people out of their sectarian hatreds and tribal divides. And even if we could, they'd fight us every step of the way because it would just be, to their eyes at least, another case of the Christian European white man attempting to impose his culture on a people who don't want it. So the question to my mind isn't, do we leave the Middle East to fend for itself even though it is a very unstable and dangerous situation, but rather how many resources and American lives do we expend before we leave the Middle East to fend for itself regardless of how unstable and dangerous the situation? We can exhaust ourselves trying to salvage an unsalvageable situation, or can leave now and use the resources that we would have wasted to accomplish something of true merit. It's really that simple. The Middle East is a lost cause.
Oh, and after billions invested into arming of jihadusts and 6 years of "Assad must go" - the US is leaving Russians to clear the mess...  Besides, Putin was dreaming so much of a joint effort to fight ISIS, hand in hand...  We have an anecdote - a surgeon is making a surgical operation, then stops, thinks for a while and with words "Damn, this was a big mistake, this one is spoiled, I'll start with another one - cuts the patient multiple times with a sculpel in a cross way... 
The Russians won't be cleaning up Jack shiat. The Russians will support Assad just enough so that he manages to reestablish tentative control over the majority of his territory, and they'll call the job done. They have no interest in anything other than keeping their client state propped up and access to a deep water port they wouldn't have otherwise. Propping up a strong arm military dictator such as Assad will not "stabilize" the ME. All it does is push the chaos down the road for another five to twenty years.
it stabilized Egypt, at least for quite a long period, the only difference between As-Sissi and Assad is that As-Sissi is "our son of a bitch" for the US. No, it won't be that simple, now after Syrian war became a part of mini Middle Eastern World War - only peace between Iran and Saudia may stopnthe war in Syria. Unfortunately Syrian war will go on for many more years, I'm afraid, if not one of major sides invests huge effort, money, everything into desisive victory. Which is still hardly achievable. Anyway, if the US leaves Syria right now - ISIS will be revived by Saudia immediately, and many more 9/11 will be just a matter of time. I believe that if the U.S. stops meddling in the ME that the various factions in the ME will be so busy killing each other and jockeying for political/economic/societal domination that they'll have little time or interest in organizing attacks against the U.S.
And I'm MORE than willing to let Russia attract their attention instead by meddling in the ME. You guys have fun.
|
|
|
| |
|
jake58
|
Apr 8 2017, 09:19 PM
Post #197
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,338
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #47
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Siberian
- Apr 8 2017, 07:31 PM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 11:54 AM
- jake58
- Apr 8 2017, 08:12 AM
They hate everyone who's not like them, even other Muslims who believe in a marginally different Allah. They're trying to take over the ME and attacking us is the best way to show they have the muscle to do it.
Which is not much different than the wars that ravaged Europe for centuries is it? Tribalism. "MY people are better and should control ____" There are people in the US who think only their people should be allowed in America because "my superior white DNA"
Never mind, Jake is a person of rarely low culture, a xenophob and generally - what word did Clinton use - garbage? whatever he says bad of others - is something said by soneobe below of someone above. hopefully, that made sense in Russian... and you of all people, calling someone a xenophobe... bwahahahahaha
|
|
That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens
|
| |
|
jake58
|
Apr 8 2017, 09:21 PM
Post #198
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,338
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #47
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Robertr2000
- Apr 8 2017, 07:04 PM
- jake58
- Apr 8 2017, 05:17 PM
- Robertr2000
- Apr 8 2017, 04:55 PM
- nNeo
- Apr 8 2017, 12:14 AM
- Harambe4Trump
- Apr 8 2017, 12:12 AM
They hate us because we are weak and ready to die.
They don't give a damn what we do here. It's what we do there. Again, not justifying it, but bombing country after country and overthrowing governments as it suits us has repercussions. Just so we're clear, you're against going into Syria then.
You don't really pay attention do you? How about you stay out of my question to Neo. How about you pay attention instead of the Gomer Pyle act - Nneo has said repeatedly he's in a non interventionist in the ME, 'just so we're clear'
|
|
That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens
|
| |
|
nNeo
|
Apr 8 2017, 09:40 PM
Post #199
|
|
- Posts:
- 2,849
- Group:
- Global Moderators
- Member
- #16
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 04:19 PM
That's really not a good argument for our continued involvement in the ME. It's not at all an argument for. I care what happens, but don't think we can fix it.
- Robertr2000
- Apr 8 2017, 04:55 PM
Just so we're clear, you're against going into Syria then. Of course. You really should have been able to figure that out :p
Edited by nNeo, Apr 8 2017, 09:44 PM.
|
|
“Strong people don’t need strong leaders.”
|
| |
|
Robertr2000
|
Apr 8 2017, 09:55 PM
Post #200
|
|
- Posts:
- 12,359
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #43
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 09:04 PM
- Robertr2000
- Apr 8 2017, 07:43 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 07:34 PM
- Siberian
- Apr 8 2017, 07:26 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 8 2017, 11:44 AM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Oh, and after billions invested into arming of jihadusts and 6 years of "Assad must go" - the US is leaving Russians to clear the mess...  Besides, Putin was dreaming so much of a joint effort to fight ISIS, hand in hand...  We have an anecdote - a surgeon is making a surgical operation, then stops, thinks for a while and with words "Damn, this was a big mistake, this one is spoiled, I'll start with another one - cuts the patient multiple times with a sculpel in a cross way... 
The Russians won't be cleaning up Jack shiat. The Russians will support Assad just enough so that he manages to reestablish tentative control over the majority of his territory, and they'll call the job done. They have no interest in anything other than keeping their client state propped up and access to a deep water port they wouldn't have otherwise. Propping up a strong arm military dictator such as Assad will not "stabilize" the ME. All it does is push the chaos down the road for another five to twenty years. Taking out Assad and enabling ISIS is stabilizing how?
I didn't say that taking out Assad and enabling the ISIS is stabilizing. So you think the US shouldn't take out Assad?
|
|
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|