So we just launched 50 tomahawks at the Syrian Government

Started by GrinningYMIR, April 06, 2017, 11:59:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

AllPurposeAtheist

Remember back in the good old days when Al Queda was the worst of the worst of the worst? Imagine if we ever actually have to confront the real worst of the worst of the worst..
Oh wait..It's in the white house or is it Mara Largo?
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Baruch

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on April 09, 2017, 12:15:14 PM
Remember back in the good old days when Al Queda was the worst of the worst of the worst? Imagine if we ever actually have to confront the real worst of the worst of the worst..
Oh wait..It's in the white house or is it Mara Largo?

Go Navy!  Unfortunately the new survivable robot vessels aren't yet deployed in any number.  One has to have a considerable stand-off distance now to attack Asia, maybe 1000 miles?  We might not even have to steam out of Pearl Harbor, since our weapons have similar reach.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on April 09, 2017, 12:11:05 PM
And by the way, we've also got the U.S. Navy strike group led by the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier making its way towards the Korean peninsula Sunday “to maintain readiness”..
Imagine that. Trump, who said we need to focus on America first instead of starting wars around the world getting ready to start wars around the world. Whodda thunk it?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-navy-sends-strike-group-toward-korean-peninsula/2017/04/09/0c00909c-1cfd-11e7-8003-f55b4c1cfae2_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_nkorea-515am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e93343ede604
Maybe he is focusing on America, and is just letting the military do whatever.

...wait, that would actually be worse.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

Draconic Aiur


trdsf

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on April 09, 2017, 12:15:14 PM
Remember back in the good old days when Al Queda was the worst of the worst of the worst? Imagine if we ever actually have to confront the real worst of the worst of the worst..
Oh wait..It's in the white house or is it Mara Largo?
Depends on whether it's the weekend or not.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total, and I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution." -- Barbara Jordan

fencerider

70yrs old and still trying to show off his codpiece....

They say his rating is already down to 35%. and he might just try something stupid to improve his ratings. Oh wait! They said that last week.
"Do you believe in god?", is not a proper English sentence. Unless you believe that, "Do you believe in apple?", is a proper English sentence.

SGOS

Quote from: fencerider on April 09, 2017, 11:05:10 PM
70yrs old and still trying to show off his codpiece....

They say his rating is already down to 35%. and he might just try something stupid to improve his ratings. Oh wait! They said that last week.
It took GW 6 years to get to that point.  But there seems to be a built in resistance to going lower than 25%, where the idiots will still approve even if convicted of murdering his mother.  I consider 25% as rock bottom.  Not a good place for a president to be.  35%?  No problem.  You're right where you should be.  Higher than that, something's wrong.

Baruch

Quote from: SGOS on April 10, 2017, 09:40:59 AM
It took GW 6 years to get to that point.  But there seems to be a built in resistance to going lower than 25%, where the idiots will still approve even if convicted of murdering his mother.  I consider 25% as rock bottom.  Not a good place for a president to be.  35%?  No problem.  You're right where you should be.  Higher than that, something's wrong.

George H W had a high rating in 1991, after his little war, where he let Saddam off the hook.  I don't count on popularity for nothing.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

SGOS

Quote from: Baruch on April 10, 2017, 01:18:16 PM
George H W had a high rating in 1991, after his little war, where he let Saddam off the hook.  I don't count on popularity for nothing.
I remember that, and at the time was disappointed that he didn't take the next superficially obvious step.  That is until he explained that the goal set by UN resolution was only to remove Saddam from Kuwait, and that further steps would take a large toll on American lives.  That satisfied me.  In hindsight, this was probably politically incorrect.  Americans were wound up and heady wanting to kick some serious ass, a political advantage that helped GW sell the invasion 10 years later, I think. 

Another thing that affected me, and possibly others was that when Scott Ritter, head of the UN weapons inspection team from 1991 to 1998 announced that they were discontinuing a search for further weapons.  This got spun as stopping inspections because Iraq would not cooperate (this happened shortly after HW was out of office), which I thought was a dumb reason for discontinuing inspections.  Years later Ritter explained that inspections ended because he was sure all of Saddam's weapons had been destroyed and accounted for.  I'm guessing for others the original spin was still believed, and helped to feed the WMD claims by the GW administration.  But this is speculation on my part.  I can only guess at the motivations of the public.


Baruch

Quote from: pr126 on April 11, 2017, 05:50:05 AM
http://gatesofvienna.net/2017/04/michael-luders-on-the-propaganda-war-in-syria-an-incredibly-dirty-geopolitical-game/#more-42669

There is so much BS now, I actually do love Big Brother!

In the US, that blood thirsty warmonger Howard Dean, Democrat Liberal ... has called for the expulsion of Rep Tulsi Gabbard, for not supporting the Matrix view on Syria.  And you thought it was only John McCain ;-)  It was Democrat Liberals, who got us into Vietnam, and Korea, and WW II, and WW I.  Some things haven't changed in the last century.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Gawdzilla Sama

"Again, to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria. If you do many very bad things will happen and from that fight the U.S. gets nothing."
â€" Trump, 9/5/13
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Baruch

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on April 11, 2017, 11:26:35 AM
"Again, to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria. If you do many very bad things will happen and from that fight the U.S. gets nothing."
â€" Trump, 9/5/13

Trump is a brand ... he says what he is paid to say.  In office he clearly has neo-con handlers now.  Every President must be a war president ... in particular ... make war on the poor, here and abroad.  Just like Obama.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

trdsf

Quote from: SGOS on April 10, 2017, 02:35:31 PM
I remember that, and at the time was disappointed that he didn't take the next superficially obvious step.  That is until he explained that the goal set by UN resolution was only to remove Saddam from Kuwait, and that further steps would take a large toll on American lives.  That satisfied me.  In hindsight, this was probably politically incorrect.  Americans were wound up and heady wanting to kick some serious ass, a political advantage that helped GW sell the invasion 10 years later, I think. 

Another thing that affected me, and possibly others was that when Scott Ritter, head of the UN weapons inspection team from 1991 to 1998 announced that they were discontinuing a search for further weapons.  This got spun as stopping inspections because Iraq would not cooperate (this happened shortly after HW was out of office), which I thought was a dumb reason for discontinuing inspections.  Years later Ritter explained that inspections ended because he was sure all of Saddam's weapons had been destroyed and accounted for.  I'm guessing for others the original spin was still believed, and helped to feed the WMD claims by the GW administration.  But this is speculation on my part.  I can only guess at the motivations of the public.
Let me first grant that hindsight is 20/20, but I do sometimes wonder if we might have been better served going for regime change back then, while the Iraqi army was folding like a house of cards and units were surrendering to news crews.  I will admit right now that had that occurred then, I would have almost certainly opposed it as an unnecessarily imperialistic act on our part, but...

...I think it would have almost certainly meant that Dubya would not have been elected president, certainly not in 2001, and very probably not at any time after that.  It also means you don't get the clusterfuck that Dubya's ill-planned invasion turned Iraq into, because Bush Sr was rather more detail-oriented than his spawn -- to say nothing of Senior having the Rolodex from Hell and the ability to use his vast network of personal connections to both gather support and cushion the damage.

But, hindsight and guesswork.  Still, the chance of Dumbass never having been president in the first place sounds monumentally appealing.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total, and I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution." -- Barbara Jordan