Search this Topic:
Apr 9 17 3:37 PM
TimeHasCome wrote:"I still think a strong case can be made for the strike Trump ordered. Syria (and Russia) violated the agreement they made to turn over or destroy their chemical weapons and forgo using them anymore. If we aren't going to enforce an agreement, then why enter into one?"
Then don't enter into one, assuming political honesty is even relevant nowadays! America needs to give up on being the world's policeman and start wars with countries who didn't do nothing to us, especially wars that we simply can't afford.
"Meanwhile there are 1000 US troops in Syria helping keep Daesh occupied so Assad can concentrate on slaughtering his other opponents. We can't really simultaneously be his partner and want him out of power, but that's where Trump is now. I much preferred Obama's course, even though it wasn't working either. "
I always thought we should just let Allah sort it all out there, which is basically what Obama did! But I'm afraid that the war industry is too powerful and right now is starving for a war, so they will find away to get us into war one way or another, and if that means letting a 9/11 type of of terrorist attack happen and using it as an excuse to get public support just like during Iraq and Afghanistan wars, then I wouldn't be surprised at all! The public isn't dumb enough to fall for that again, I would hope, but on the other hand, they probably are! They did get me on the Afghanistan war for a little while, I admit, I was only 17 though! By the time I was 19, they weren't wise enough to get me with their Iraq war propaganda or any of their pranks since then.
Apr 9 17 3:40 PM
Underground Democrat wrote:Shadowmane2000 wrote:There's no solution to Syria. They was one 6 years ago when Obama dropped the ball. But now, it's too convoluted to have a happy ending. It's a civil war. We should not be involved. And no, we shouldn't house refugees (the majority of which will be terrorists parading as refugees in order to hit soft targets in the US) either. Muslim refugees should be housed in places like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Iran. Oh wait. They have said they don't want them because... well... most of them are terrorists masquerading as refugees who will destabilize their countries. Typical ,racist, right-wing ,stooge.
Shadowmane2000 wrote:There's no solution to Syria. They was one 6 years ago when Obama dropped the ball. But now, it's too convoluted to have a happy ending. It's a civil war. We should not be involved. And no, we shouldn't house refugees (the majority of which will be terrorists parading as refugees in order to hit soft targets in the US) either. Muslim refugees should be housed in places like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Iran. Oh wait. They have said they don't want them because... well... most of them are terrorists masquerading as refugees who will destabilize their countries.
Apr 9 17 3:41 PM
Redfisher wrote:Underground Democrat wrote:Shadowmane2000 wrote:There's no solution to Syria. They was one 6 years ago when Obama dropped the ball. But now, it's too convoluted to have a happy ending. It's a civil war. We should not be involved. And no, we shouldn't house refugees (the majority of which will be terrorists parading as refugees in order to hit soft targets in the US) either. Muslim refugees should be housed in places like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Iran. Oh wait. They have said they don't want them because... well... most of them are terrorists masquerading as refugees who will destabilize their countries. Typical ,racist, right-wing ,stooge.You're a typical intolerant, left-wing drone. Shadow isn't racist. He's been around here a lot longer than you.Keep doing what you do best.
Apr 9 17 4:49 PM
Apr 9 17 5:03 PM
Apr 9 17 5:10 PM
Apr 10 17 9:44 AM
Apr 10 17 10:34 AM
This rather expresses my opinion about the sudden humanitarian emotions from the 'King of Tweet' and his lack of empathy for those thousands of starving/dying from hydration and drowning refugees fleeing from Aleppo!
We've locked our borders down so very securely - "NO MUSLIMS WELCOME HERE!"
Apr 10 17 4:43 PM
TimeHasCome wrote:"Just a few months ago Alicia Keys expressed hope that since Trump was a New Yorker his actions might be more liberal than his rhetoric(which was kinda your hope),I kinda hoped so too, but Trump's racist history told me Trump spoke with forked tongue, or in other words: Trump's leanings always has been conservative, his more liberal stance was because most of his associates in NYC were liberal and he didn't want to alienate them (especially in regards to business), but the real Trump IMO has always leaned to the right-wing."
That's not really true. He was always an asshole who looked down on people who weren't as fortunate as him, many of whom happened to be minorities, however, politically speaking, he was always against the far-right and social conservatives, mostly a liberal on foreign policy, a liberal on pretty much all social issues, including abortion (even as far as PBA), gay rights, marijuana rights, and even some economic issues, including supporting a single payer health care system and admitting that the economy is always better when Democrats are in charge. While he was never a pure leftist and he was certainly never a good person, he still showed no signs that he was going to be the messiah of the far right, social conservatives and right-wing assholes in general. In a way, that's disappointing, because he did have potential to be something more than the embarrassment he is today and use his abilities to do something good for the country. I would expect this out of Ted Cruz and Paul Ryan, but I thought even Trump could've done better than what we are seeing.
Yeah,we know Bernie Sanders is a saint to you, he's not to me, so let's move on."
I didn't say he was a saint, and he's far from one, I said he was the only good choice we had and the only one that I was sure wasn't going to start new wars in the middle-east. Why? Because Bernie is honest. Trump is a liar, so I didn't absolutely trust or believe ANYTHING he ever said, good or bad, that's why I didn't vote for him, obviously, and that was my point.
I still think if Obama had done more in Syria in 2013 (after he was re-elected) we wouldn't have half the problems we have today in Syria ,we'll never know."
Done WHAT more? He's given all the money and weapons to FSA as much as as he could. He had no public support to invade Syria, the UN wouldn't approve of it (due to Russia's pressure), and the congress wouldn't be totally supportive of a war either, and would rather use it against the Democrats during elections. There was NOTHING for him more to do in Syria than he already tried, we all waited for Santa and wanted the FSA to succeed, but there has to be a point when we face reality. Our best bet is to stay away from there and let the Arab world figure it out.
If Assad is removed ,I don't think the U.S. will do it alone, look at the nations saying they want him out: The UK, France, Germany , Turkey ,Saudi Arabia, Israel, "
Then let THEM do it, and stay out of it! This is NONE of America's business. Let Turkey and Saudi Arabia invade Syria to defend their own causes and deal with Putin...Israel bombs Assad every time he does something he shouldn't be doing, and that's fine, they are enemies! But what is in there for us?
" I think they are going to ally to get Assad out ,what will come up in his place will be a problem ,and I'm sure someone like Trump will probably put a puppet government in his place,I don't like that ,but I don't see better options right now, especially considering the president we have now.
And no, worse human rights abuses are not happening elsewhere now, especially in regards to Sarin:"
I trust them "so much" that I wouldn't believe them even if they told me the sky is blue, so no, I don't buy anything they tell me now...the first time they cried wolf I ran to see, the next time I didn't, and the next time, and...this is like the 20th time they are doing this, and at this point, it could be a wolf or it could be the lochness monster for all I care, I'm absolutely done with them and their warmongering crap. I've heard all of those war crimes and human rights abuses stories about Saddam, about the Shah and the guy before him, about Gaddafi, about Mubarak, and about every Arab dictatorship that America has an issues with. And I'm sure all of those stories had truth to them as well, and it's always sad when things like that happen, but the point is, America won't make anything better, and allowing our emotions to assume something that's not true because of desperation, will not make the future in the mid-east any better, it will make it even worse.
And by the way, what could POSSIBLY go wrong if we removed Assad through a war (assuming Russia would even allow that to happen) and put a puppet government, just like we have done in Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan in the past?! The perfect cure to corrupt dictators and war is MORE corrupt dictators and war, that will OBVIOUSLY make everything so much better, just like it has in every other country that we tried it in the past....NOT!
IMO it is hypocritical to protest Eric Garner and ignore Assad and his use of Sarin."
HUH?! Eric Garner was an American who was murdered in America because of American law enforcement, of course we have the right to protest. We can also protest anything that Assad does, sure, but again, Assad is a foreign dictator who is murdering citizens of his own country. Assad didn't throw bombs at America because America abused and murdered Eric Garner and other people, right? Why? Because America's abuse of its citizens rights and murder of its citizens by police is none of Assad's business, or the business of any other world leader. So then why is it OUR business to bomb him for his crimes against humanity in Syria?
Actually ,the U.S were helping the Allies as much as they could before Pearl Harbor, and I don't think FDR knew about Pearl Harbor in advance, there are allegations that British intelligence might have known about Pearl Harbor in advance and Churchill decided not to tell FDR, so that would get U.S. into the war,we'll never know if that is true or not, but ,I wouldn't put that past Churchill."
We were helping them to the same extent Obama was helping the FSA in Syria, and that's how it has to be. Supporting somebody is one thing, but actually going to war should only be done in self-defense. WWII was the ONLY war since last century that was justified and unavoidable for America. Even then, I would still argue that without WWI (which was a BS war, including America's involvement) there wouldn't be WWII or Hitler.
Apr 10 17 4:52 PM
charvakan wrote:Let's see who has the magic formula for dealing with atrocities committed by Arab national leaders against their own people:
Reagan, after Saddam Hussein gassed thousands of Kurds, was mute. After all, Saddam was then our ally against Iran.
GHWBush decided not to do more than roll back Iraq's illegal conquest of Kuwait. he set up the no-fly zone to give some protection to Kurds (and al-Qaeda), but the Shi'ites were on their own.
Clinton clamped more sanctions on Iraq, which arguably punished civilians the most.
GWBush was talked into invading Iraq on a completely bogus pretext, and the place became the scene of astonishing brutality for years, and it's not over yet by a long shot.
All of the above ignored Syria completely.
Obama joined NATO in bombing Qaddafi's forces into impotence, averting a slaughter of rebel populations. Libya is now a mess, and Obama got endless grief for not getting the approval of Congress.
Obama threatened Assad when he used poison gas, but settled for Syria's handing over the big majority of their chemical weapons. He asked Congress for an authorization to use force this time and didn't get one.
Trump saw some pictures and reacted by striking an airbase in a mostly symbolic attack without asking for permission. Assad was not in any danger from this response and until this week he was backed to continue in power. Sissi is welcomed as a pal.
To sum up, Presidents have tried pretty much everything, and nothing has worked. If anyone says that if President Whosis had done whatsis in the year xxxx things would have been significantly better, where is he/she getting that? The best course for the US seems to be to risk as little as possible and try hard not to screw things up worse, because clearly no one has any clue what would make things better.
Apr 10 17 4:53 PM
TimeHasCome wrote:"On the other hand, we are the world's #1 power and we would be foolish to throw that away, especially when that can be used for good."
Hardly. We are like 20 trillions in debt to China and our president is a Russian puppet...we can't even feed our people and give them free health care like in every other normal and semi-normal country, but we are supposed to have this magic power..."Team America" style...to save the world and destroy evil dictators without any consequences? And Americans just don't care anymore, they can't get off of their iphones long enough to fight a war, and for better and for worse are more selfish than ever, in general, not a great trait during war time. Let's get real, bro, we are what Mohammad Ali was in 1979, if we don't quit now and get over our egos, our last few battles will most likely be just as embarrassing, but even worse; they will be as damaging as Ali's last few fights, followed by a slow and painful road down the hill.
Sure, we will always be #1 world power in the sense that we can always pull a Samson option and blow up the entire earth, sure, we got the most amount of nukes, but that would still not do us any good, either.
Apr 10 17 5:00 PM
This rather expresses my opinion about the sudden humanitarian emotions from the 'King of Tweet' and his lack of empathy for those thousands of starving/dying from hydration and drowning refugees fleeing from Aleppo! We've locked our borders down so very securely - "NO MUSLIMS WELCOME HERE!" Excellent cartoon. Trump is a hypocrite, scumbag, jerk, but even a hypocrite, scumbag ,jerk can be in the right direction once in a while ,many liberals and conservatives alike have sympathy for this action, and many liberals and conservatives alike are opposed to this action.
Trump is a hypocrite, scumbag, jerk, but even a hypocrite, scumbag ,jerk can be in the right direction once in a while ,many liberals and conservatives alike have sympathy for this action, and many liberals and conservatives alike are opposed to this action.
Apr 10 17 5:05 PM
Apr 10 17 5:13 PM
Apr 11 17 12:51 AM
Apr 11 17 7:36 AM
Apr 11 17 4:55 PM
TimeHasCome wrote:"Maybe you had blinders on about Trump because you liked him on TV,from the Central Park 5 case on I knew he was no real liberal."
I actually always thought he was an asshole, nor did I EVER consider him a "real liberal" (neither is Hillary, or most Democrats, as a matter of fact), but he did have as many liberal views as non-liberal views and used to side more often with Democrats than with Republicans, he was never a crazy right-wing fanatic until very recently.
Yesterday on Meet The Press, Bernie Sanders himself said that Assad "Ranks at the top" of the worst dictators ,I do agree with him that Trump should consult with congress ,and I think Hillary would have done that."
Assad can be the devil himself for all I care, and yet I'm still not going to support a war unless it is in self-defense.
Obama didn't take a strong stand on Syria in 2013 and the GOP won the mid-terms, so that strategy didn't work, IMO once he won re-election ,Obama should have put politics aside and took a stronger stand on Syria ,I think he would have gotten some bi-partisan support.
Of course he would, Republicans love their wars, McCain and other senile warmongers would've loved it! Fuck them and fuck their wars!
Sarin is not crying wolf, even Bernie Sanders admits that in the video link above.
I also don't think a puppet government would be good (and I don't think Hillary would have done that),but judging by the remarks of all involved ,it does seem to be way this is going, why do you think I even started this thread? Because it was obvious to me then that this is where Assad's gassing was going ,and when Scott Pelly broke in to my viewing of the TV series Mom Thursday Night ,I instantly thought "Oh shit, this is the bulletin I've been dreading since January 20th"."
I don't care at this point even if it is a wolf or a lochness monster coming out of the lake for all I care! The neo-cons need to learn a lesson one of these days for crying wolf hundreds of times, we can't just keep letting them get us into wars, it has to stop sometimes!
Saddamn did gas his own people. "
And you opposed the Iraq war, nevertheless! Why is it any different now with Syria?
As for your not seeing my analogy about Eric Gardner and what Sarin does to people ,I'll just give quote from someone who knows way better than you or I what a cruel place the world can be:"If you care about injustice and if you care about freedom, and you care about human rights, then you care about them everywhere"-Lara Logan ,and what did happen in Egypt yesterday?
Coptic Christians slain in Egypt by ISIS while they worshipped on Psalm Sunday, yeah ,Sisi's kangaroo courts and authoritarianism are working out real well (I'm being sarcastic).
I agree with you on WWI. "
Christians and secular people in Egypt are almost exclusively on Sisi's side, he's their best bet right now. And I have a feeling that Sisi will hit back at the radical Islamists and the response will be very very hard. Lara Logan's quote is nice but it's easier said than done, the simple truth is that we can't save everybody or force western morality on third world countries, no matter how hard we try! She, of all people, found that out the hard way, too. Justice has to start at home, and until we are so perfect and wonderful when it comes to dealing with police brutality, government corruption and racism/bigotry by authority, violation of human rights, especially gay rights, or even electing a semi-normal government that isn't completely embarrassing...we really have no right to expect a Muslim dictatorship (a country that has been going from one dictatorship to another since before the biblical days) to turn into Sweden overnight. Let's be real here, we have no room to talk, and for the amount of human rights abuses that America committed over the years, your argument would totally justify another country punishing us for that. Interventionist policies hasn't made it better for America or for anybody, especially not for the countries that we tried to "help", it only makes things worse.
Now, Russia and Iran are saying they can't let the U.S be the world's only superpower."
US isn't the only superpower. A war with Russia or China would really be the last war ever because nothing will be left afterwards. Pretending otherwise isn't wise.
"I've never supported Lindsay Graham ,but I will say for him that he doesn't have his head up his ass the way most Republicans do ,unlike most Republicans he can see the forest for the trees, I don't agree with the Hawkishness he shows here ,but he is correct in that Putin and Assad are both war criminals and Iran is Assad's proxy ,and that can't be ignored.
Also ,Graham makes TV history by saying "f you" on Meet The Press."
Fuck him too! His attempt at "being tough" to make up for his obvious gayness, doesn't impress me and never did. If he wants to fight Assad, he can use his own money to fund a private army that will go fight in Syria, I don't approve of wars that aren't in self-defense and I don't want to pay for that shit.
Apr 11 17 9:52 PM
In a 233-page ruling, District Judge Jack B. Weinstein dismisses a lawsuit against US chemical companies that supplied the military with Agent Orange during the ‘60s and ‘70s. The lawsuit was filed by a group of lawyers on behalf of a million or so Vietnamese, seeking compensation for the effects of the toxic defoliant, which was sprayed on at least 3,181 villages during the Vietnam War (see 1960-1973). Agent Orange has been linked to cancer, diabetes and birth defects among Vietnamese soldiers, civilians and American veterans. Lawyers for Monsanto Co., Dow Chemical Co., Hercules Inc., and more than a dozen other companies argued that they were just following the legal orders of the commander-in-chief. “We’ve said all along that any issues regarding wartime activities should be resolved by the US and Vietnamese governments,” Scot Wheeler, a spokesman for Dow Chemical, claimed. “We believe that defoliants saved lives by protecting allied forces from enemy ambush and did not create adverse health effects.” Coming to the defense of the chemical companies, the Justice Department filed a brief asserting that a ruling against the firms could cripple the president’s powers to direct US armed forces in wartime. In his ruling Judge Weinstein concludes that the plaintiffs did not prove that Agent Orange had caused their illnesses. “The fact that diseases were experienced by some people after spraying does not suffice to provide general or specific causation,” Weinstein writes. “There is no basis for any of the claims of plaintiffs under the domestic law of any nation or state or under any form of international law. The case is dismissed.” [BBC, 3/10/2005; ASSOCIATED PRESS, 3/10/2005]
Entity Tags: Monsanto, Hercules, Inc., Jack B. Weinstein, Dow Chemical
Apr 11 17 10:30 PM
Apr 12 17 10:39 AM
In 2013, when Barack Obama was president, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that only 22 percent of Republicans supported the U.S. launching missile strikes against Syria in response to Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against civilians.A new Post-ABC poll finds that 86 percent of Republicans support Donald Trump’s decision to launch strikes on Syria for the same reason. Only 11 percent are opposed.-- Overall, a bare 51 percent majority of U.S. adults support the president’s action in our new poll. In 2013, just 30 percent supported strikes. That swing is driven primarily by GOP partisans. For context, 37 percent of Democrats back Trump’s missile strikes. In 2013, 38 percent of Democrats supported Obama’s plan. That is well within the margin of error.
In 2013, when Barack Obama was president, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that only 22 percent of Republicans supported the U.S. launching missile strikes against Syria in response to Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against civilians.
A new Post-ABC poll finds that 86 percent of Republicans support Donald Trump’s decision to launch strikes on Syria for the same reason. Only 11 percent are opposed.
-- Overall, a bare 51 percent majority of U.S. adults support the president’s action in our new poll. In 2013, just 30 percent supported strikes. That swing is driven primarily by GOP partisans. For context, 37 percent of Democrats back Trump’s missile strikes. In 2013, 38 percent of Democrats supported Obama’s plan. That is well within the margin of error.
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.