Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44

Thread: Biden's Administration is now bombing Syria

  1. Top | #11
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Local group: Solar system: Earth: NA: US: contiguous states westernmost - IOW here
    Posts
    14,882
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    33,095
    Rep Power
    65
    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.
    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.

  2. Top | #12
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    20,699
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    36,385
    Rep Power
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    He was the better evil.
    Why settle for better evil when you can vote best evil?

    Too bad Democratic primary voters preferred Biden to Bernie.
    A Bernie nomination would have meant Trump almost certainly winning the reelection, possibly in a landslide.

  3. Top | #13
    Squadron Leader
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Land of Smiles
    Posts
    1,740
    Rep Power
    17
    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.

    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.

  4. Top | #14
    the baby-eater
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Straya
    Posts
    4,407
    Archived
    1,750
    Total Posts
    6,157
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by Swammerdami View Post
    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.
    I don't see how this retaliatory bombing prevents or delays Russia's control of Syria. It seems like that contest is already over, and the US lost.

    Quote Originally Posted by Swammerdami View Post
    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.
    What purpose do these attacks serve?

  5. Top | #15
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    32,628
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    75,101
    Rep Power
    100
    I would suppose reminding the proxies that we do have teeth and we can strike when and wherever we want. Whether that actually provides a tactical advantage by making proxies have to think more, I have no idea.

  6. Top | #16
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    24,511
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    41,064
    Rep Power
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Derec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    He was the better evil.
    Why settle for better evil when you can vote best evil?

    Too bad Democratic primary voters preferred Biden to Bernie.
    A Bernie nomination would have meant Trump almost certainly winning the reelection, possibly in a landslide.
    Bernie would have crushed Trump.

    Fucking senile Joe Biden beat Trump badly.

  7. Top | #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Ohio, U.S.
    Posts
    121
    Rep Power
    4
    It would be nice if the Right would pick a fucking lane, and decide whether Biden (and the Left) is a namby-pamby, muslim-loving, Kumbaya-singing squishy snowflake for not having the balls to ever bomb Syria, or a reckless, reactionary, war-mongering threat to world peace for having the balls to bomb Syria.

    Or, for simplicity, they could stick to the current script. Biden's a simpering candy-ass on days he doesn't bomb any muslims, and an unhinged, bloodthirsty killer on days when he does. That sounds about right for Team Trump.

    (and, uhm, yes--I know he's gone. Not all of YOU seem to have gotten that memo.)

  8. Top | #18
    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
    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.

  9. Top | #19
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    24,511
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    41,064
    Rep Power
    84
    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.

  10. Top | #20
    Veteran Member KeepTalking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    St. Louis Metro East
    Posts
    4,480
    Archived
    3,057
    Total Posts
    7,537
    Rep Power
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by LoAmmo View Post
    It would be nice if the Right would pick a fucking lane
    I can only assume this is directed at the OP, and though Jason and I seldom see eye to eye, I have to give him credit for sticking to his lane here. He has always been anti-war to a fault in this forum, this is not a case of his saying one thing when Trump was in office and another with Biden in office. So, credit where credit is due.

Posting Permissions

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