Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44

Thread: Biden's Administration is now bombing Syria

  1. Top | #21
    Veteran Member funinspace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    4,031
    Archived
    10,245
    Total Posts
    14,276
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post

    It does.

    If you don't have them there as targets, they won't be shot at. That deprives the US of a pretext for retaliation, which is why the troops are still there.
    Since they are already hitting us here at home do you expect our withdrawal from their tyranny to cause their attacks here to decrease? Fools dream.
    Since...since...we have been mucking around in the ME since WWII, somewhat supplanting European machinations from before WWII, we have continually made ourselves a target for attacks by hostile groups from the ME.

  2. Top | #22
    Veteran Member funinspace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    4,031
    Archived
    10,245
    Total Posts
    14,276
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Swammerdami View Post
    The Mideast's politics and wars are complicated; I cannot hope to keep up. U.S. is strongly allied with at least two strong brutal regimes, Saudi and Israel, and has fought stupid wars. I do wish U.S. policies would improve.

    The U.S. fought in Afghanistan for two decades, ostensibly to curtail the power of Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda and ISIS are weakened now, though the war never was very smart. The war cost lives and treasure ... and is ending with the Taliban returning to power. What a fiasco!

    The Iraq War was even stupider. It had zero strategic purpose, destroyed at least a million lives, and cost trillions in treasure. Trillions added to the national debt with nothing to show for it. Not to mention a generation of American soldiers suffering PTSD.

    However the War in Syria DOES have strategic purpose. Russia hopes to turn Syria into a vassal state and acquire a military presence in the Mid-East. This would not be good for the U.S. nor for Western Civilization more generally. Iran is effectively allied with Russia in this endeavor. If U.S. aggression can prevent or delay the fall of Syria to Russia and its allies, that would be good.
    This last paragraph is the essence of most of the necon arguments going back to Vietnam and before. Russia has had close ties to the Syrian leaders since at least 1971 when they were granted a Naval base in Tartus. Evidently, you are right in that you didn't keep up, as such a Russian-Syrian association happened decades ago...

    It may be difficult or impractical for the U.S. to act successfully in the Syrian conflict. Perhaps there is some clever non-military approach. But at least U.S. attacks against Russian surrogates (e.g. Iran and Hezbollah) in Syria have a real purpose, unlike the stupid Cheney-Rove wars started 18 years ago.
    So was the creation of the Frankensteinian monster called ISIS worth this strategy, as cobbled together by the agencies of SA (and their piglets), Turkey, and the US?

  3. Top | #23
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,547
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post
    Someone used drones to attack US personnel in Iraq (which are still there why?) so the US blamed Iran and bombed Syria.

    That makes perfect sense. Might as well bomb Libya as well.
    How much our military's actions against a perceived threat actor makes sense to a rando on the internet is important to who and why?

  4. Top | #24
    Might be a replicant Emily Lake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    It's a desert out there
    Posts
    3,379
    Rep Power
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Emily Lake View Post
    To be fair, the vast majority of congress are hawkish, regardless of their political alignment. They use different rhetoric to justify their aggressions, but at heart, both sides are globally aggressive.
    I think they are sheep.

    They look at the other sheep to determine which way to move.

    Not directed by inner principles.
    On this point, you and I agree.

  5. Top | #25
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,547
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ZiprHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer

    I would have no US personnel in Iraq.
    Doesn't really answer the question.
    It does.

    If you don't have them there as targets, they won't be shot at. That deprives the US of a pretext for retaliation, which is why the troops are still there.
    victim blaming

  6. Top | #26
    Might be a replicant Emily Lake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    It's a desert out there
    Posts
    3,379
    Rep Power
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Nut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post

    It does.

    If you don't have them there as targets, they won't be shot at. That deprives the US of a pretext for retaliation, which is why the troops are still there.
    victim blaming
    Kind of painting the aggressor as a victim, aren't you?

  7. Top | #27
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,547
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Emily Lake View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Nut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post

    It does.

    If you don't have them there as targets, they won't be shot at. That deprives the US of a pretext for retaliation, which is why the troops are still there.
    victim blaming
    Kind of painting the aggressor as a victim, aren't you?
    I don't actually know if the victim of the drone attack was actually the agresser of a larger conflict, under which the drone pilot was a victim... but was that drone pilot's victimhood undermined by their prior aggression that might have started the larger conflict, which itself arose from.....?

    How far back do we go to assign victimhood? the war of the neanderthals versus the homosapiens?

  8. Top | #28
    Might be a replicant Emily Lake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    It's a desert out there
    Posts
    3,379
    Rep Power
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Nut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Emily Lake View Post

    Kind of painting the aggressor as a victim, aren't you?
    I don't actually know if the victim of the drone attack was actually the agresser of a larger conflict, under which the drone pilot was a victim... but was that drone pilot's victimhood undermined by their prior aggression that might have started the larger conflict, which itself arose from.....?

    How far back do we go to assign victimhood? the war of the neanderthals versus the homosapiens?
    I'm content with somewhere around the time that we moved into someone else's country and set up shop as if we had a right to be there.

  9. Top | #29
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,547
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Emily Lake View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Nut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Emily Lake View Post

    Kind of painting the aggressor as a victim, aren't you?
    I don't actually know if the victim of the drone attack was actually the agresser of a larger conflict, under which the drone pilot was a victim... but was that drone pilot's victimhood undermined by their prior aggression that might have started the larger conflict, which itself arose from.....?

    How far back do we go to assign victimhood? the war of the neanderthals versus the homosapiens?
    I'm content with somewhere around the time that we moved into someone else's country and set up shop as if we had a right to be there.
    So your root issue is with the displacement of the Native Americans during the colonization of the Americas, and then us staying here?

  10. Top | #30
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    6,668
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Nut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Emily Lake View Post

    I'm content with somewhere around the time that we moved into someone else's country and set up shop as if we had a right to be there.
    So your root issue is with the displacement of the Native Americans during the colonization of the Americas, and then us staying here?
    "Displacement"? That's a funny way to describe the mass murder and enslavement of millions of people.

    We should consider all of these situations, the present military operation included, to be criminal in character and transparently opposed to the supposedly democratic and libertarian values we claim to support as a nation.
    "Banish me from Eden when you will, but first let me eat of the tree of knowledge."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •