News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

ANOTHER STUPID F**KING WAR

Started by pr126, April 12, 2018, 02:13:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

PickelledEggs

The attack targeted chemical weaponry facilities that were also low in population. Relax. Don't get your panties in a bunch, yet, at least.

PickelledEggs

On a lighter note, here is yaboi, Alex having a hilarious reaction to it https://twitter.com/Millenniel_Matt/status/984991225211125760

SGOS

Quote from: Baruch on April 14, 2018, 09:08:40 AM
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked.

Like weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or communist dominoes in Vietnam.  I certainly fell for that stuff up into my teens, and if it were well done, I'd probably have bought it much later in life.  Iraq was the wake up call for me.  I was stunned at how happily 67% of the voters bought obvious lies and naked propaganda and rushed to support Bush's idiotic plan.  Someone had to pay so voters could have closure.

Although, Bush also used a clever a shot gun approach that covered an array of issues to please the palates of all the main ideological groups in the voting registry:   "Our way of life was under attack," for the PATRIOTS.  "Freeing the Iraqi people," for the COMPASSIONATE SOFTIES," and "Bring it on," for the knuckle dragging REDNECKS.  If some voters opposed the war for one of the lies, there was another lie that would convince them.

There was also the 9-11 catalyst working for the leaders.  The voters were in a state of hysteria which interfered with their ability to process information.  In fact, we had been attacked... by someone... Maybe they were from Saudi Arabia, or probably Afghanistan.  But Saddam might have been behind the whole thing... Yes, it must have been Saddam... that was obvious.

It was like watching a tragic comedy taking place among my compatriots.  The US had gone insane.  OK, we were always insane, but this time it wasn't the familiar pleasant kind of insane.


Unbeliever

Quote from: Shiranu on April 14, 2018, 01:30:31 AM
So, apparently the missiles have started flying. Let's see how Russia responds.

I rather die in an explosion than hours or days of having my internal organs fail.
Out with a bang, not a whimper?
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Shiranu

Quote from: Unbeliever on April 14, 2018, 01:16:03 PM
Out with a bang, not a whimper?

Eh, more like out with a bang instead of wailing misery for hours as my lungs ooze out of my mouth and my eyes are seared and boiled out of my head...
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

fencerider

Baruch: it is the leaders of a country that determine policy
In the case of the U.S. that policy would be scatter-brained


Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on April 14, 2018, 12:04:03 AM
For the life of me I don't really see a hell of a lot of difference between killing someone will chemical weapons vs plain old high explosive bombs..
dead is dead, but bombs are quick and chemicals slow and painful

Of course we could ask why he used them instead of reg bombs. Maybe they had already been purchased and it aggravated Syria’s government to buy stuff they couldn’t use.... maybe Assad knew they would die painfully and it turned him on


PickledEggs: The attack targeted chemical weaponry facilities that were also low in population. Relax. Don't get your panties in a bunch, yet, at least.
It doesnt bother me in the least that a chemical warehouse got destroyed. It does aggravate me that he had zero Constitutional authority to launch the attack without the express permission of Congress. It does aggravate me to no end that members of Congress are so stupid when it comes to the Constitution they dont really care if he has authority or not. (using my Goofey voice “ garsh we gave George Bush authority to fight terorists in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001. uhhh, yup! I’m pretty sure that applies to a civil war in Syria in 2018, yup”)
"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.

pr126

#37
Did Obama ask the Congress when Lybia was attacked?

Quote“When there is no imminent threat to our country, he cannot launch strikes without authorization from the American people, through our elected representatives in Congress,” wrote Representative Justin Amash, a freshman Republican of Michigan, on his Facebook page. “No United Nations resolution or Congressional act permits the president to circumvent the Constitution.”

Shiranu

>mfw almost literally every single military engagement by an American president since Vietnam has been initiated without the approval of Congress.

At this point, it really doesn't matter what the law says. As fun as it is to say fuck Trump, or fuck Obama, or fuck Bush for doing it... it is de facto law at this point. Just like medical marijuana is federally illegal, but legal in several states. The law says one thing, but reality does another.

That said, I'm not sure what Obama has to do with this, but sure lets go with it.
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

fencerider

the article says March 2011. I was driving OTR at that time and I missed a few things that happened in the news. I dont give Obama a pass but I dont know anything about what happened in Lybia March 2011.

plain and simple the Constitution gives the president authority to command the military. It gives Congress authority to decide when to use them.

A prememptive first strike against North Korea (without express permission of Congress) would not only be an impeachable offense, it would be an offense that requires impeachment. My own personal opinion is that it should also require prison time.
"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.

fencerider

if it doesnt matter what the law says then why do us ordinary folks still get in trouble for violating it with our “creative” business practices?

Is there a double standard here? one for the gvment and the wealthy and another for the rest of us??? Naaah couldnt happen in the USðŸ¤"
"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.

Baruch

The FISA court (which didn't exist earlier) gives the President to right to F anyone he/she wants without anyone's approval.  But of course it is up to the alphabet agencies (and Alphabet aka Google) to tell the President what he/she thinks.  Congress delegated their war making authority to the Executive long ago ... and per the Supremes, whatever Congress does, is legal by definition (not what Nixon said).

Basically the true Congressional view is ... saying to the President, consult with some of us (the one's directly involved with the military) before you do anything serious.  We don't have to inform the other representatives ... because they don't have clearance.  Then if you do well, we will praise you and claim partial credit for our wise policies ... but if you do badly, we will condemn you, and claim you ignored our wise policies.
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.

Cavebear

Quote from: pr126 on April 13, 2018, 10:56:47 AM
Minor detail. The Russian military is also present there. 

If they become collateral damage, it could be the start of something very unpleasant.
Unintended consequences?

Russia says Syrian 'chemical attack' was staged

In a very abstract sense, I wouldn't mind seeing who has better weapon tech.  I bet the Russians don't.

But in the general sense, I don't want anyone to die in a test.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

pr126

#43
Here is my take on this Syrian episode so far. Take it or leave it.

The rebels/jihadist/ISIS/ call them what you will are losing the game with Assad.

They know that when chemical weapons are used Assad gets ass whipped by the Americans (who were arming and financing these dudes all along), and they are using the same tactic as last year, almost to the day and create the conditions for America, UK, and France to fight their wars for them.
Every little helps.

Actually, roumors are that the British did it. I don’t know, but I wouldn’t put it past them.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201804121063460158-british-forces-syria-ghouta/

America and the EU are always chomping at the bits to give Assad a good slap.

Cui bono? The rebels of course, by destroying Assad's reputation (again) and weakening his position.

But we have evidence that he did it! Really? Is it so difficult to manufacture evidence?
Who do you believe? Assad or the others?

Just my two cents.






SGOS

Quote from: pr126 on April 15, 2018, 07:19:04 AM
Here is my take on this Syrian episode so far. Take it or leave it.

The rebels/jihadist/ISIS/ call them what you will are losing the game with Assad.

They know that when chemical weapons are used Assad gets ass whipped by the Americans (who were arming and financing these dudes all along), and they are using the same tactic as last year, almost to the day and create the conditions for America, UK, and France to fight their wars for them.
Every little helps.

Actually, roumors are that the British did it. I don’t know, but I wouldn’t put it past them.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201804121063460158-british-forces-syria-ghouta/

America and the EU are always chomping at the bits to give Assad a good slap.

Cui bono? The rebels of course, by destroying Assad's reputation (again) and weakening his position.

But we have evidence that he did it! Really? Is it so difficult to manufacture evidence?
Who do you believe? Assad or the others?

Just my two cents.
I don't place much credibility in either the Assad or the Rebel argument.  I'd like to believe my government, but I've learned the hard way over the years how duplicitous my government is.  I can't believe anything they say anymore, especially when it comes in the form of evidence that just happens to justify the mindset of my leaders.  We had evidence of WMD in Iraq, for example.   And Trump doesn't even act like he knows what's going on or cares one way or the other.  He acts like his military advisors briefed him of the attack a couple of days ago, just to keep him in the loop.

Maybe the rebels did it.  It's not out of the question.  They can blame it on Assad and gain worldwide support, even though they're just as big a dicks as Assad himself, possibly bigger.  Maybe Assad did it to warn pockets of rebel support what he will do to them, and then say the rebels did it.  Neither of those two parties can be trusted either.

I think for humans in the current global environment, the default psychological setting is to choose who the guilty party is.  I don't think the default setting is not to know.