|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Riddle me this batman.... /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1377976418 Message started by raydawg on 08/31/13 at 12:13:37 |
|
Title: Riddle me this batman.... Post by raydawg on 08/31/13 at 12:13:37 Just heard Bo and Jo exclaim the need to strike Syria NOW! But how come if the killing of innocent babies,women, etc warrants us striking with deadly force, then how come us killing, babies, women, etc, is justified? :-? |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by oldNslow on 08/31/13 at 13:28:06 Quote:
It isn't. Even if we managed to intervene without causing any "collateral damage" as it's called, which isn't likely, there isn't any justification for this country getting involved in Syria's troubles. Sarah Palin got this one right when she said "Let Allah sort it out" We've got no reason to do anything over there. It's their sh*t hole country and whatever they do to themselves inside it is their problem. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 08/31/13 at 13:32:11 I'm with Bo and Jo. I don't want to rehash all the reasons we ought to - and I've read all the reasons why not. While the reasons why not are certainly valid, I think the reasons why we should inflict some damage on Syria's military outweigh the reasons we should not As for civilian casualties - if that was the only reason that mattered then we'd never use force to protect our citizens or national interests. I don't believe there is any military in the world that is more concerned - and more capable of limiting - civilian casualties than the USA's. For the Syrian military, I offer some a few bits of sensible advice to limit civilian casualties. Don't locate civilians at likely military targets - and don't shot at cruise missles as they fly overhead. If you don't damage the cruise missle, it will hit it's intended target. A military target. If you damage it - it will go boom wherever it lands. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by raydawg on 08/31/13 at 13:53:32 565A585C56535954465D04350 wrote:
Is it fair to say then you were with George and Dickie too? If not, why....and please list for me the differences that you believe makes this go a necessity, thanks! BTW, hide sight re: Saddam et el, is not a quantifier on the "current" situation, as it is not as yet available in Syria, so I hope you don't try that reasoning. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 08/31/13 at 20:43:17 I do hate when I have to assume. So I'lll have to ask. By George do you mean the younger George Bush and Dickie Richard Nixon? Keep in mind that George Bush (Sr) was president during the first Deserst Storm war against Iraq and it Eisehower that sent the first American military into Vietnam. The war in Vietnam drastically escalated, slowly under Kennedy and then drastically under Johnson. "Dickie" if you refer to Nixon is the president that actually got us OUT of Vietnam. I was opposed to the war in Vietnam for two reasons: I never believed in the "domino theory" and the military objectives were never defined. We weren't fighting a war to win, it was some sort of drawn out "police action" I supported the first Gulf war, opposed to the second. The case for intervention is simple and it is by all statements limited. the US president drew a red line, Assad crossed it. The use of WMD is not allowed. Period. Having said there will be consequences - there must be. Syria's chemical arsenal is of particular concern to us in this conflicty. The US is going to want to make sure they are locked down. Syria has the WORLD's third largest stockpile of chemical weapons. The last thing the USA wants is for members of the smaller, but better organized muslim rebels to get their hands on such. Which is why someone's suggestion on the boards here that the USA military gave the rebels chemical weapons - which the mishandled and blew up in their faces - is so ludicrous. We are not giving WMD's to anybody - particularly groups that are affliated with muslim extremists. Nor do we want Syria's military rolling these weapons out of storage for use. And potential capture. If we were arming the rebels we'd be giving them shoulder fired anti aircraft and anti tank weapons. A barrage of cruise missles, a few air strikes. Assad's nose gets bloodied and he hopefully locks down the chemical weapons and fights the rebels the hard way, block by block, town by town. If you gas entire neighborhoods - the world is watching and will respond. Last, but not least: It is America's best interest to encourage democracies. Name a war we fought against a democracy. I will point out again that a lot of prominent Republicans have been calling on Obama to help the rebels in Syria for over a year. Obama is even doing this "right" - asking for Congress to approve. If you don't want them to do so, write your congressman. I intend to talk to mine. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/31/13 at 21:41:58 505C5E5A50555F52405B02330 wrote:
The case for intervention is simple and it is by all statements limited. the US president drew a red line, How is it the Pres saying we would do somethin somehow just translates into action? Did he ask Congress if he could say that? Because CONGRESS decides on war, SO, HE screwed UP{ talking like that. NOW,, Assads forces were winning AND Assad has been warned And THERE IS plenty of reason to believe the Rebels actually did it. HOW many times have we been LIED to to get us to support a war?> You trust the GOOBS? WHY? Assad crossed it. The use of WMD is not allowed. Period. Having said there will be consequences - there must be. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by raydawg on 08/31/13 at 22:24:59 I do hate when I have to assume. So I'lll have to ask. By George do you mean the younger George Bush and Dickie Richard Nixon? No, I am talking about B2 and Chenney, and the same reasons they gave for going after a mad dictator too. But I see you already said you were against it, can you share with me the difference to why you support one and not the other? |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/01/13 at 00:17:46 74677F62677161060 wrote:
There was never any WMD's in Iraq. The case was always weak. B2 just wanted some payback for a failed assisnation attempt on his father. We KNOW FOR FACT that Syria has chemical WMD's. It's not guessing, it's not maybe. They not only have them, they have the world's 3rd largest stockpile. So just be logical - Syria has the world's third largest stockpile of chemical weapons - and over a thousand people died in a chemical weapons attack. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by WebsterMark on 09/01/13 at 05:33:02 There was never any WMD's in Iraq. The case was always weak Sat what?! The case was always weak? How can you say that? The US, UN, The Brits,The French and on and on listed their evidence during our slow crawl to to war in Iraq. Did you have evidence back then all these intelligence agencies did not? Did you know something Colin Powell did not? Iraq's water under the bridge and I'm not suggesting we use 20/20 hindsight and revisit our months long rush to war, but at the very least you can't say weak. Hopey-changes is tripping over his own red-line because he had zero political experience until he anointed himself king. Say what you want about politicians, but the game they play teaches them that frustrating ability to talk a lot without backing theirselves into a corner. Hopey opened his dumb mouth with the redline thing and now he's dragged Russia into this. Ive changed my tune on this lately. originally, i was of the opinion, screw this, someone else's turn to be the neighborhood policeman, but no ones stepping up. i don't think the French will follow through. They are scared of their Muslim population like the Brits are. Target and kill Assad. Support who rises to take his place as long as they squash the Muslim brotherhood. Or, tell Israel to do it, and we'll support them with cruise missiles if it gets out of hand. One way or another, Assad's gotta go now and we're involved. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by raydawg on 09/01/13 at 08:55:24 6F6361656F6A606D7F643D0C0 wrote:
There was never any WMD's in Iraq. The case was always weak. B2 just wanted some payback for a failed assisnation attempt on his father. We KNOW FOR FACT that Syria has chemical WMD's. It's not guessing, it's not maybe. They not only have them, they have the world's 3rd largest stockpile. So just be logical - Syria has the world's third largest stockpile of chemical weapons - and over a thousand people died in a chemical weapons attack. [/quote] Uh....that's what I thought you might say. I wonder why then if Bo is as certain as you then why does he even use the gassing to innocents, which we don't even know who,what, or whom for certainty, as the reason? I understand he's your horse, you want him to win, at any cost....but you better grasp the consequences of such actions. Why is the world so quite on these WMD, are they a threat to them too? Why are they not afraid? Are they just not as smart as you and Bo? Nope, all the evidence points to another reason, something like Midnight rider suggest. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Jerry Eichenberger on 09/01/13 at 09:24:23 I sick of supporting regime change in these Middle Eastern and other Muslim countries, Iraq included. Back when the dictators were in power in Iraq, Iran, Libya, Egypt and Syria, and nobody messed with the other, things were fine - stable, that it. Libya learned its lesson from Reagan, and all was quiet until two years ago. Sadam was quiet at 1991 until GWB decided to throw him out. Iran was quiet until Carter chickened out, wouldn't let Israel kill Khomeini while he was still in Paris and thereby keep the Shah in power, then we sit back and let Egypt go nuts. Those people can't handle self rule - Muslims want theocracies, not democracies. I say, protect the strongmen - at least they bring stability to the region and keep the crazies under control. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by WebsterMark on 09/01/13 at 10:41:56 So Jerry, as long as organized crime keeps things under control, leave them be?... Let them control their neighborhoods. I don't think that's something you could agree with. It's easy to say as long as the buses run on time, leave these dictators alone. But we forgot an awful lot of people die in those well behaved dictatorships. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/01/13 at 10:59:58 You have the right to go deal with a neighbor who you believe mistreats his family? Wearent the worlds Daddy. AND. even tho Syria HAs chem weapons, that doesnt mean they used them. Ignore the obvious all you want tho, |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Jerry Eichenberger on 09/01/13 at 11:02:59 WM - Organized crime is a whole different matter, because they are HERE and try to control OUR people. I'm talking about them strongmen in peanut countries where people are incapable of self rule. I see JOG is off on another conspiracy theory that the rebels gassed themselves; Gee. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/01/13 at 11:13:48 This is a democracy, it's in the hands of Congress for now. We might assume they will get better intel than us and make their decision accordingly. I say again a significant number of conservative republicans have wanted action for a long time. But ray and webster justin - you keep talking about we don't "know" who did the chemical attack. Seriously? Where did the rebels get chemical weapons? In sufficient quanity to cause over a thousand deaths? And the delivery systems? So I live next door to you. I raise chickens. I have thousands of chickens - the third largest supply of chickens in the entire world. As far as anyone can tell, you don't own a single chicken. One day you come home and find chicken crap all over your yard. The neighbors think you have a few chickens hidden in basement, got them out and they crapped all over your place? REALLY Your neighbors are non too bright As for Desert storm 2. We had UN inspectors on the ground. They couldn't find anything in the way of WMD. As I recall, they eventually canned a few people for the "bad intel" provide. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by WebsterMark on 09/01/13 at 11:16:37 Just to clarify, I'm not in that club. I believe it was Assad. I'm not a conspiracist guy. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by WebsterMark on 09/01/13 at 11:21:05 I still think The organize crime metaphor is valid in this sense: I'm a firm believer in what Reagan described as a shinning city on a hill. The US is different, we have both a moral standing and the ability to act. I think we are obligated to act. No, we can't so everything and we are not perfect, when it comes to something like this, we're about the only ones who can act. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/01/13 at 11:23:35 023037262130271834273E550 wrote:
My bad. Sorry. :-[ |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/01/13 at 11:37:17 OHHHH,,, Its a Conspiracy theory to believe the rebels did it? Assad, warned & WINNING,, did what he didntNEED to do & had been told by a country that has invaded many that we would if he did,, & HOW many times HAVE we been lied to in order to create an environment of support? Is that conspiracy theory TOO? Ignore the obvious, be a dupe, again, |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by oldNslow on 09/01/13 at 11:37:53 Jerry E. wrote: Quote:
Correct as far as the inability to rule themselves goes. But protecting the strongmen hasn't worked out so well for the US either. I think our policy should be hands off as long as the violence stays inside their borders. Let them exterminate one another. The fewer muslims the better as far as I'm concerned. As far as a military response to the chemical weapons in Syria - and I don't care who did it - it's nothing more than Obama trying to save face because he shot his mouth off and now looks like the narcissistic girl thingy that he is if he doesn't do something. There have been many thousands killed - I've seen estimates as high as seventy thousand- with weapons that are considered legitimate; bombs,bullets etc. since this started. That was apparently OK with Barack and his cronies. Now Assad(or the rebels, depending on what you chose to believe) kill a thousand or so with chemicals, and the US HAS TO DO SOMETHING. Same old Bullsh*t all over again. We never learn. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/01/13 at 11:40:19 A VERY low %age of Americans support this. WE, the American people Have learned,OUr leadership do the bidding ofthe globalists. War makes them $$$ & givesthem control,, |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Starlifter on 09/01/13 at 12:32:18 What a joke to see the US on a moral high horse preaching to the world, when our war criminals play golf and enjoy their lives. The hypocrisy is so glaringly blatant. It's simply disgusting. If we were willing to express the least amount of contrition, sorrow or regret for many our own deeds, acknowledgment that we sell more weapons on the world stage than another country, etc., just a small reality check, we might gain a modicum of credibility. Of course, admitting to anything, or apologizing for anything is red meat for the rightwing, who jump at any chance to portray Obama as "weak" or "un-American" Should that be determining our behavior? Of course not. Without showing an ounce of contrition or humility we are not a credible voice. Let someone with cleaner hands make the case. No other of the 190 or so other countries support this military intervention. The moral outrage seems to be promoted by those that will make profits from war. Dropping American bombs and missiles on funerals, weddings and first responders?? Where is the outrage?? Maybe we should take a good long look at how we treat our OWN war criminals, for a change. Our own government lets Its own citizens die in hospital waiting rooms or in their beds at home because they don’t have healthcare. They’re not spending hundreds of billions of dollars intervening in foreign conflicts for humanitarian reasons. The number of high-ranking people who claim our right to bomb anyone anywhere for any reason whatever is astoundingly dangerous for our self-interest. No one in the entire world except a few uninformed people in the US thinks bombing Syria is a good idea in the first place. But the hypocritical stance of the US on this is not lost on the average global citizen of the world. Hell we use depleted uranium like it's going out of style, which most consider a chemical weapon. It should be the responsibility of the UN to seek a solution. Of course Russia will no doubt seek to prevent meaningful solutions. A lot like we prevent any meaningful steps from occurring when Israel is called to task. Japan's Fukushima reactors are leaking nuclear waste water into the Pacific. If we're so worried about people being affected by man-made toxins why aren't we turning our attention to something that can really have an effect on us?? What about the starving fly covered children of Somulia and other waring nations concern us…we could use that military money to provide food and medicine to help those children in a humanitarian effort. Seems like if it doesn't involve oil and blowing up sh!t we're not interested! |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by raydawg on 09/01/13 at 12:37:24 2D2123272D28222F3D267F4E0 wrote:
Why then is Kerry not spelling out the threat of WMD's instead of sarin? headlines:" Citing sarin use, US seeks to bolster Syria case" B2 had a congressional backing too, but then Al Gore et al, cried later they were lied too, etc.... How can Bo be against B2 when it is almost the same circumstance, yet now it makes perfect sense? Just like raising the debt ceiling, against, now he for it????? How, why? PS: I don't expect a real answer ::) the link: http://www.komonews.com/news/national/Citing-sarin-use-US-seeks-to-bolster-Syria-case-221999891.html |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Midnightrider on 09/01/13 at 12:58:04 2D222E242F2229252235202235470 wrote:
And if we go there and blow the place to hell and kill thousands of innocent women and children, then leave they will still be incapable of ruling themselves. Happens everytime. We never learn from our past mistakes. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/01/13 at 13:06:15 Geeze,, I am such an IDIOT! Worst case scenario – gas weapon in the hands of untrained ... ... it just might have been a major screw up by the untrained rebels handling chemical weapons ... as to accidentally releasing ... off at the mouth, made ... bzerob1.wordpress.com/2013/...gas-weapon...untrained-asshats - Cached Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack | The ... Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack. Militants tell AP reporter they mishandled Saudi-supplied chemical weapons, causing accident theunhivedmind.com/.../rebels...for-chemical-weapons-attack - Cached Syrian Rebels Used Chemical Weapons, Russia Claims ... Syrian Rebels Used Chemical Weapons, Russia Claims. ... Beverly Osu Strips Off Her Clothes To ... 11-Year-Old Boy Accidentally Hangs Himself While Trying To Play ... www.informationng.com/...rebels-used-chemical-weapons... - Cached Are the Syrian rebels the ones using chemical weapons ... Are the Syrian rebels the ones using chemical weapons? ... not the Syrian regimewhich may have used the sarin gas that set off ... News anchor accidentally ... www.salon.com/2013/05/...rebels...chemical_weapons_partner - Cached Syrian Rebels Behind Chemical Attack, Weapons Provided by ... The Obama administration seems confident that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was behind the recent chemical attack that killed at least 355 Syrian ... www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/foreign-policy/war... - Cached Disclosure: Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons ... Now Obama has no excuse to invade Syria. Please share, everyone! ~ BP Reblogged from Brian Kelly's blog: Disclosure: Rebels Admit Responsibility for ... 2012thebigpicture.wordpress.com/2013/08/30/disclosure... - Cached Syrian Rebels Claim Saudi Prince Bandar Responsible For ... It is growing increasingly possible that public outcry might make the Imperial force of American Exceptionalism, with its humanitarian war sights set on ... www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zLKbQ1fBHU - Cached .Play Video More results from youtube.com » Syria accuses rebels of using chemical weapons against ... Syrian state media accused rebels of using chemical arms on Saturday against government troops trying to storm a contested neighborhood of Damascus, claiming a major ... www.newser.com/article/da8cbvmo2/syria-accuses-rebels-of... - Cached More results from newser.com » Promotiona |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by raydawg on 09/01/13 at 13:11:45 7D59545E595758444259545542300 wrote:
And if we go there and blow the place to hell and kill thousands of innocent women and children, then leave they will still be incapable of ruling themselves. Happens everytime. We never learn from our past mistakes.[/quote] Not only that, does it not give proof to their claim against us as imperialist, and just more fodder to the teachings of the future generations? It must, and therefor the same old mindset of mass execution via OUR justified strike(s) only passes this turmoil into the future, with no chance at all for remedy >:( |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/01/13 at 14:31:58 0B141215080F3E0E3E06141853610 wrote:
I cannot get most of your links to work. One does a 404. One brings up something not in HTML. Another is blank. Most of the time the simplest explanation is the truth. We know Syria's military has chemical weapons. We have no reason to believe the rebels do. Just because you read it as a contrarian viewpoint on the internet, doesn't make it true. For instance: Proof Obama is the antichrist http://www.obamaantichrist.org/obama-antichrist-evidence/ Proof the earth is flat, not round: http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm Proof we never sent men to the moon: http://apollozero.com/ As far as I'm concerned, you can just ad "the Syrian rebels cooked up Sarin gas and killed themselves" to the list |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Serowbot on 09/01/13 at 16:26:49 In large part,.. the reason Obama is president is because of the last two wars... He won't get us into another... There will likely be some missile strikes to a few strategic weapons sites in Syria... Enough to make Asshat not willing to use those chemical weapons again... Basically,.. a smack on the hand, to let him know that those actions won't be tolerated... |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/01/13 at 16:42:38 4056415C44515C47330 wrote:
+1 |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by oldNslow on 09/01/13 at 18:03:43 Quote:
Or not. Obama tossed the ball to congress 'cause he hopes they say no and get him off the hook. Or, in the event they agree to some sort of strike, and something goes wrong, he can spread the blame around instead of taking all the heat himself. The real danger is that crap like this has a nasty way of getting out of control once it's started. Especially when the real reason that the POTUS decides to shoot missles at someplace is just so that the leaders of Russia and China won't think he's a wimp. You don't really think he gives a hoot about a few thousand dead Syrians do you? |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/01/13 at 18:26:14 0836373B2935345A0 wrote:
I think Obama and other elected members of congress on both sides of the ailse care a lot about Syria's substantial chemical weapons aresenal falling into the wrong hands. Which is entirely what might happen if they start using them regularly. How much Obama personally cares about the Syrian casualties I do not know. But that reminds me of a Desert Storm II joke: Let's lighten the mood, shall we? It's early March 2003. A guy walks into a bar in Washington DC and notices George Bush and D Chaney sitting at the bar having something of a heated conversation. After a few minutes, he decides that this is a once in a liftetime opportunity to actually meet the President and Vice President of the United States, so he walks on over to the bar and says "Mr. President and Vice President, I'm sorry to bother you, but I just wanted to say hello and shake your hands." Cheaney says "No problem. Sit down and have a drink. In fact maybe you can help settle an argument George and I are having." The guy replies "I don't know how I could be of help, but I'm certainly willing to do whatever I can." Cheaney explains: "We are thinking about killing 100,000 Iraqis and one blonde with big tits." The guy says "Why do you want to kill a blond with big tits?" Cheaney looks at Bush and says "See George. I told you no one would give a *spoon* about the dead Iraqis." |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by oldNslow on 09/01/13 at 18:52:44 Quote:
Even if that is so, how exactly will blowing up a few radar installations, or SAM sites ,or whatever, do anything to prevent that from happening. In fact, Syria's chemical weapons are ALREADY in the wrong hands and we don't even know for sure whose hands those are. It doesn't really matter.There are no good guys in the fight going on over there. And there is no good reason for this country to do anything. Unless you think a president's unfortunate off the cuff remark, and his bruised ego is a good reason for potentially starting a war. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Paraquat on 09/01/13 at 20:50:12 http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/britain-sold-nerve-gas-chemicals-2242520 Brits supplied the chemicals to make the weapons. BTW, back to our previous conversation Jerry... quote from the article above: Quote:
--Steve |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by mpescatori on 09/06/13 at 01:40:35 +1 0A05090308050E020512070512600 wrote:
My own considerations, especially considering Italy alone has far more Syrians and Lybians over here than you have or will ever have. AND we're much closer to the Middle East than you are, AND we've got a good 3000 years experience of dealing with "the East Coast" of the Mediterranean, way back in the days when the Phoenicians were running the Persian Kings' Navies against Greeks and Egyptians... 1. Remember Guernica (if you don't know what Guernica is, it's a city in Spain; google it and read about it) Whereas during the Spanish Civil War everybody blamed the Loyalists (Fascists) for bombing Guernica, some 60 years later a former Republican (Communist) Leader admitted on his death bed the bombing was actually Republicans on Republicans, done on purpose in order to cause a public outcry hoping to gain international support. It worked, but what parent would hurt his own children in secret in order to gain support? 2. The Syrian regime started opposing public demonstrations (which were simply asking for new elections), and the "violence" was limited to tear gas and rubber bullets until someone started shooting at policemen... with precision weapons (sniper rifles) THAT caused an escalation. Incidentally, Assad's claim that the "rebels" were supported by "external terrorists" was proven correct in more than one instance, with prisoners being identified and linked to Iraq, Al Qaeda, and even some US muslim converts (!!!) 3. The Syrian regime lost a number of cities - which means it also lost the local garrisons and armories; the original protesters soon cried out to international media that their protest had been pried away from them by "violent extremists" who fight with heavy machine guns, bazookas and mortars - which is something someone demonstrating for new elections will clearly not do. 4. The "external terrorists" have recruited volunteers from Iraq, Afghanistan and some Central Asian Republics - those same which provided fresh recruits to the Taliban Regime in Afghanistan. The proof is the languages those guerillas speak (not always Arabic but Urdu or Turkik) and the techniques used to produce IEDs, Improvised Explosive Devices. As any Bomb Squad can testify, every "bomber" has his own technique and every explosive device carries a "signature" - the IEDs filmed by European Journalists have all been identified as "the same kind used in Afghanistan and in the first years of the Iraqi Occupation" - hence, they were made by those persons or by their trainees. 5. WHO IS THE LOCAL SUPERPOWER ? The USA ? Think again. The local superpower is TURKEY. If Turkey is sitting pretty then nobody should make so much as a hint of a move. If military action in Syria causes retaliation or a reaction by Syrian forces or forces of another nation, Israel might well be targeted; and if Israel reacts (it would be entitled to) we are in for yet another full scale war in the Middle East. NOT IN MY FRONT YARD !!! PS: given the level of high tech and strategic transportation available to all... .. as 9/11 already pointed out, the US are NOT as untouchable as they were during WW2. I am a convinced non-interventionist, and you should be, too. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Starlifter on 09/06/13 at 17:46:44 Funny thing about the US and it's moral outrage over some kind of gas used by somebody... Item "U.S. Shipping Thousands of Cluster Bombs to Saudis, Despite Global Ban" Is this to protect more children?? Cluster bombs are banned by 83 nations. The world recoiled in horror when it learned that Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad's forces have killed children with such weapons. But that isn't stopping the U.S. military from selling $640 million worth of American-made cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia, despite the near-universal revulsion at such weapons, and despite the fact that relations between the two countries haven't been going well of late. Cluster bombs in Vietnam, they spit out dozens, even hundreds, of micro-munitions in order cover a wide area with death and destruction. These weapons are used for killing large groups of people, destroying unarmored vehicles and dispensing landmines or poison gas. Some of the Soviet-made incendiary cluster bombs used by Assad's forces during Syria's civil war are even designed to light buildings on fire and then explode after sitting on the ground for a while -- thereby killing anyone who gets close enough to try to extinguish the flames. I hear that children love them ...they think they are toys and go to pick them up ....BOOM! 'Snort'…USA, spreading peace and democracy, one bomb at a time. America is selling its soul to enable the capitalists' lucrative business of death for money thrive. After all, the business of America is business. War is the candy of the 1%. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by WebsterMark on 09/07/13 at 05:24:09 Just saying, but I bet you'd pick the corn out of Jane Fonda's crap if she asked you to. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by WebsterMark on 09/07/13 at 06:34:55 Okay, guilt pangs have struck me. Maybe the Jane Fonda corn comment was over the top, but for crying out loud...... Hard to take the equivalent of flag burning. Yea, I get it, it's your right blah, blah......but still...try saying one thing positive .... |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Paraquat on 09/07/13 at 06:48:17 I was just about to make a comment that your last 4 or 5 posts have been spot on and then you back pedal like this... I still think your last 4 or 5 posts were spot on. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/07/13 at 07:07:14 Lifter has neen on an absolute tear,, right on. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by raydawg on 09/07/13 at 08:31:52 36292F2835320333033B29256E5C0 wrote:
+1 ;D |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by raydawg on 09/07/13 at 08:33:04 36292F2835320333033B29256E5C0 wrote:
+1 ;D |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/07/13 at 09:03:38 093B3C2D2A3B2C133F2C355E0 wrote:
Guilt pangs should strike you! ;D It's unfair and inaccurate to slam someone for stating what is obviously true. Obvious even to Dwight Eisenhower, who made "Military Industrial complex" a household term. "A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction... This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist." Also factual is the continued use of and sale of by the USA military of cluster bombs. A weapon indeed banned by most of the world. Cluster bombs are an extremely effective weapon against humans. Used against enemy soldiers, there is nothing particularly more immoral about killing enemy ground troops with cluster bombs than any other type of bomb. I don't have any particular preference as to how I get blown up. The problem with cluster bombs, like biological and chemical weapons is they tend to result in far more killing and maiming of non combatants. It's well documented that about 5% of the "bomblets" do not initially explode. Shiny little silver things that look like children's toys. And that's exactly what happens with the un-exploded bomblets. They get picked up by children. And then blow up. You can't be the world's preeminent super power without a big military-industrial complex. And that is expensive. Allowing US military contractors to sell weapons to other countries - that we consider allies - reduces the costs for our own military. It's actually a good thing. So I agree with Eisenhower. America needs a "military industrial complex". The research, development, manufacture and sales of advanced weapons keeps us safe. But we have to be alert and on guard - or that same complex starts exerting influence on the actual decision making process when to take military action. Time to get over Jane Fonda. She has apologized publicly many, many times and privately several times to groups of Vietnam veterans. "he without sin cast the first stone" and all that. If you were actually an adult during the Vietnam war then you'd know is was a pretty terrible time for the USA. It wasn't a war, it was a holding action. Our soldiers were not allowed to win and our army and commanders had never been trained in fighting a "defensive" action. The result's were ugly for our military, ugly for our society, ugly for our country. It was nothing at all like the revisionist, popular movies of the last couple of decades. Kennedy had 16.000 Americans soldiers and advisers in Vietnam and had removed 1000 of them after his reelection. A few years later Johnson had that up to 200,000 and at it's height it was what, almost half a million US soldiers? Boardies here seem timid of firing a barrage of cruise missiles at Syrian military targets from ships safely out of harms way. World's police, all of our cowardly elected leaders need replace, keep our nose out of other people's business. Will turn into an opened ended quagmire. Yada, yada, mew, mew. I think you youngsters here have no sense of history and don't know what a real quagmire even is. Yet you crack on "Hanoi Jane" who was, at the time, representing a view point held by a LOT of Americans that we needed to quit bleeding America dry supporting a corrupt regime on the other side of the world. It seems like that with the prevailing viewpoint on these boards that America has no national interests outside our own borders and needs to stay out of other countries conflicts that Jane Fonda would be a hero to you and you'd have posters of her in your garage. The military is one of several tools that America has and should use to ensure that our vital national interests are met. Leaders of countries the world over need to be concerned - even fearful - of the likely response of getting out the WMD's. If you own such, you had better keep them locked down or you will be held accountable. It's as simple as that. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/07/13 at 09:10:45 726F7A6C7C7E6B706D761F0 wrote:
The exact same facts argue to fight them "over there" rather than over here. The belief that if we just mind our own business and stay behind our own walls that the bad guys will leave us alone is misguided and lacks perspective. Show me in history how that has worked out for most people and nation states. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by oldNslow on 09/07/13 at 09:33:44 Quote:
Quote:
I did my stint in this country's military during the Vietnam war,( USN 1969-1972) so I'm not exactly a youngster. And studying history, particularly military history, is one of my major interests so I think I actually have a pretty good sense of perspective. "Fighting them over there" is certainly appropriate in some circumstances. But this thread is about the situation in Syria. There is NOTHING that either side in that conflict can do to threaten the US,with the possible exception of a small scale terrorist attact on a US facility of some sort somewhere in that part of the world. And as long as they are engaged in fighting one another even that is unlikely. I am not an isolationist. I understand that there are times and places where you have to fight - either as an individual, or as a nation. This is not one of them. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/07/13 at 09:48:51 6F51505C4E52533D0 wrote:
I did my stint in this country's military during the Vietnam war,( USN 1969-1972) so I'm not exactly a youngster. And studying history, particularly military history, is one of my major interests so I think I actually have a pretty good sense of perspective. "Fighting them over there" is certainly appropriate in some circumstances. But this thread is about the situation in Syria. There is NOTHING that either side in that conflict can do to threaten the US,with the possible exception of a small scale terrorist attact on a US facility of some sort somewhere in that part of the world. And as long as they are engaged in fighting one another even that is unlikely. I am not an isolationist. I understand that there are times and places where you have to fight - either as an individual, or as a nation. This is not one of them. [/quote] I respect your perspective and viewpoint. We only disagree then on whether Syria matters. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/08/13 at 00:18:54 Why dont people remember the list of nations to be taken down? Is it not odd every place weve been was announced a few years ago? WE, people WE, our forces & our proxies are STARTING these problems, THEN the media starts telling us about the horrible people REsponding! Youre being PLAYED,, |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/08/13 at 05:11:21 637C7A7D60675666566E7C703B090 wrote:
Perhaps you refer to the US State Dept's "State Sponsors of Terrorism" list? It currently includes: Cuba Iran Sudan Syria Former countries on the list that have been removed are: Iraq Libya North Korea South Yemen Out of four former countries on the list, only two had American military intervention. Could be the other two got the message? It is possible you know that countries are on the list because they deserve to be so. because they actually sponsor terrorism and are a threat. Protecting it's citizens from security threats is fundamentally what nation states exist for. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by WebsterMark on 09/08/13 at 05:12:41 Guilt pangs should strike you! It's unfair and inaccurate to slam someone for stating what is obviously true. Obvious even to Dwight Eisenhower, who made "Military Industrial complex" a household term. Don't misunderstand the source of my guilt. Star's rant is still idiotic and dead wrong as usual. I just thought the "corn" comment, while accurate, was to graphic. Think of it as a an NC-17 rating instead of R. Although when you're talking about the "Dennis Rodman" of SuzukiSavage.com, it would be hard to be too rough on him. His "love" of country is inspiration... |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by oldNslow on 09/08/13 at 06:05:50 Tony S wrote: Quote:
We don't even disagree about that. I think what happens in Syria will matter a good deal in the unfolding events in that part of the world. What we disagree about is that I think a US military strike is pointless. Both sides involved in the actual fighing over there apparently do too. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10293591/Syrias-rebels-and-soldiers-agree-military-strikes-will-change-nothing.html |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/08/13 at 07:00:18 Tony,, joinup.. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by mpescatori on 09/08/13 at 09:33:55 717D7F7B71747E73617A23120 wrote:
The exact same facts argue to fight them "over there" rather than over here. The belief that if we just mind our own business and stay behind our own walls that the bad guys will leave us alone is misguided and lacks perspective. Show me in history how that has worked out for most people and nation states. [/quote] As a former high school student in the US schooling system, I unfortunately DO understand the level of geographical and political nearsightedness of many. I remember the "World Maps" hung on classroom walls, nice big North&South America, with US Dominions (=colonies) patched in otherwise empty bits of ocean, and Europe, Africa and Asia squashed to the sides, looking smaller and smaller, less and less important as the geographical areas approached the edges of the map. Of course, it was all a matter pf perspective and "planar projection", but the point is, far too many people think "There is America, and then the rest of the world out there somewhere..." Nothing could be farther from the truth. From 1945 to 1990, two major superpowers played a chess game on the playing board of the World, namely the US and the USSR, with other "also rans" such as the UK, France, and China. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the demise of the Soviet Union, the USSR crumbled into the Russian Federation and its CSI satellite states and China grew to take 2nd place in "The Great Game". Today, the US are the only superpower to still use the same strategy since 1945, that is, puppet governments where possible and exporting its own industry asap. And if both fail, find a way to strongarm them with a military demonstration or two. Unless any of you have served in Europe, Africa or Asia in the US Forces in the rank of LTC or above, you may have little grasp of the tension that sometime runs even between the US and its own allies. The US is playing a dangerous game of "tails I win, heads you lose" with the smaller nations, but has not been in a one-on-one confrontation, serious confrontation, since the Korean War... ::) Actually... since the Civil War 1861-1865. Isolated and protected by two Oceans, the US has fought its last five or six wars sending troops and equipment overseas, much unlike European and Asian Nations which have seen the fighting on their own soil. Whereas, I'm sure, every town and village in rural US has a monument to its own military KIA / MIA, nowhere is there a plaque to remember the civilians killed by enemy bombings. On the other hand, Europeans have been involved in wars, one way or another, since time immemorial, and these days village elders will sigh in beatitude when they comment one to another "we've been in peace for the last 70 years..." That is why I mentioned 9/11. It hurts, I know it hurts. Nor was I trying to be a smart aleck. I was trying to say, in as few words as possible, that if one plays fair, there is nothing to fear. But if one plays dirty, things will get dirty. TonyS, you asked me to mention a Nation which was not hit by international terrorism ? Italy: the last time we had an internaitonal terrorist attack was 27 december 1985, and even then it was PLO gunmen against Israelis in an International Airport Terminal, not in the streets somewhere. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome_and_Vienna_Airport_Attacks Please note the same PLO also attacked Vienna Airport, Austria being a neutral Country which, in those days, did NOT play ANY role anywhere. So much for minding its own business and being neutral. Italy has been sending troops to ALL UN-or EU- backed international missions since 1981 with UNIFIL-1. In fact, in many instances Italy was the THIRD contributing Country after the US and the UK - which, when you consider the number of troops sent compared to the overall number of serving men, is quite a feat. Italy is also well known for being one of a handful of Nations to open its field hospitals to the local civilian population. There were times when more children were born in Italian Field Hospitals in Mogadishu or Kabul or Beirut or Herat than in their own homes. YET WE HAVE NO TERRORIST ATTACKS. What does this tell you ? It tells ME if you reach out with a helping hand, they will not bite it. But if the helping hand smacks them in the face, they will smack back. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by oldNslow on 09/08/13 at 10:18:43 mpescatori, Interesting and pretty accurate analysis, I think. I'm not so sure about this statement though Quote:
Perceptions of what is fair vary a lot from place to place and even among individuals in the same country and with similar backgrounds. Letting ones guard down because one thinks they are treating others fairly may not be the wisest policy. There are people, and nations, that only respect superior strength. "Walk softly, but carry a big stick." to dredge up an old cliche., may work better in the long run. With respect to the situation in Syira - I don't think anythig good would come from actually using that stick |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Midnightrider on 09/08/13 at 10:32:39 I don't believe using that stick anywhere would do anygood unless we are attacked first. We've spent way too much time and money trying to rule the world and all its done is let this country go to hell and fall apart. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/08/13 at 10:34:17 Weare used like the Mafia Muscle by the globalists. Our foreign policy is whatever benefits them |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by mpescatori on 09/08/13 at 13:37:40 625C5D51435F5E300 wrote:
One of my most senior colleagues is Dutch. The Netherlands had colonies in the Far east, however they adopted a most unique strategy: let them do whatever suits them, provided business is good. From the Dutch perspective, since "New Amsterdam" and Guyana in the New World and other nice places in the Indian and Pacific Oceans were essentially merchant outposts in foreign lands... much as the Phoenicians and the Carthaginians did in the Mediterranean... the Dutch always had very good relations with the local population and their priestly and ruling classes. Hence, today if you travel to the Netherlands you will see plenty of Asians but no "Integralistic Islamic" attitudes... ...much UNLIKE what happens in the UK, France, Belgium (who had the Congo and squandered it)... We shpuld learn from them. Believe it or not... our real enemies are NOT the Islamists (who, incidentally, up until the 1980s were nice and minded their own business) but the major western corporations, some of which are so rich and powerful they have their own armies, air forces and security services... and have a GIP much larger than the GDP of the smaller African and Asian Nations where they do business... Did BP actually PAY any damage for the Gulf oil spill ? Can you imagine a similar spill in Nigeria ? They would just gun down the local protesters and blame some "extremist terroristic cell" for the violence. Dig up Bob Dylan's "Masters of War" and listen to the lyrics... Regards, |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/08/13 at 18:49:00 4E5346504042574C514A230 wrote:
Agree with much of your perspective. However - interesting what you have said and I have bolded about muslims and the 1980's. Your statement ignores the rise of Islamic fundamentalism - which is easily dated at 1979 with the Islamic revolution in Iran. We all need to understand our conflicts with radical Islamic fundmentlism are not by accident or avoidable. Minding our own business, trying to find common ground - not going to work. These Islamic fundementalists see "human rights" completely different than democracies or countries where the prevailing faith is Judaism or Christian. A few quick examples include: Equality of men and women Separation of Church and State Freedom of Speech Freedom of Religion Freedom from religious persecution. America - and the western democracies - are not going to be able to avoid conflict with the Islamic Fundamentalists. We are - by their standards - a Godless corrupt people that tolerate other religions, allow our women to be educated and are governed by secular goverments. They believe that their faith demands that we reform or die. It is really as blunt as that. Keep in mind please that I am only referring to the Islamic fundamentalists. The great majority of Muslims view Islam as a religion of peace, love and tolerance. But unfortunately for us, the fundamentalists started gaining increasing sway in Islamic nations starting in 1979. So yeah, it was all good until the 1980's. Can't go back in time, have to live in the here and now. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Midnightrider on 09/08/13 at 20:51:06 Our real enemy is our economic terrorist right here. No one overseas can do the damage they've done. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by mpescatori on 09/09/13 at 01:12:27 54585A5E54515B56445F06370 wrote:
Agree with much of your perspective. However - interesting what you have said and I have bolded about muslims and the 1980's. Your statement ignores the rise of Islamic fundamentalism - which is easily dated at 1979 with the Islamic revolution in Iran. We all need to understand our conflicts with radical Islamic fundmentlism are not by accident or avoidable. Minding our own business, trying to find common ground - not going to work. These Islamic fundementalists see "human rights" completely different than democracies or countries where the prevailing faith is Judaism or Christian. A few quick examples include: Equality of men and women Separation of Church and State Freedom of Speech Freedom of Religion Freedom from religious persecution. America - and the western democracies - are not going to be able to avoid conflict with the Islamic Fundamentalists. We are - by their standards - a Godless corrupt people that tolerate other religions, allow our women to be educated and are governed by secular goverments. They believe that their faith demands that we reform or die. It is really as blunt as that. Keep in mind please that I am only referring to the Islamic fundamentalists. The great majority of Muslims view Islam as a religion of peace, love and tolerance. But unfortunately for us, the fundamentalists started gaining increasing sway in Islamic nations starting in 1979. So yeah, it was all good until the 1980's. Can't go back in time, have to live in the here and now. [/quote] Read my bold. Then analyse the attitude of YOUR extreme right "anti-abortionists" (who will gladly MURDER an abortionist gynecologist) the attitude of the "Creationists" (who INSIST the universe was created in 6 days as the Book of Genesis describes) the attitude of the State of Mississippi (whish ratified the Anti-Slavery Bill dated 1866 only last spring and the attitude of Southern Baptists in general, and Westboro Baptists in particular. Such attitudes would have been "kept under control" by the Judiciary System in Europe - we've had our share of extremism, thank you very much - but you guys seem to be much too permissive to realize there is a gap between "freedom of opinion" and imposing a minorioty's opinion on a peaceful majority. Now, please, research Blackwater Security Consulting, and ask yourself how on earth a privately owned company can be contracted to execute military missions for the CIA. In Europe, it would have been the MOD's job. |
|
Title: Re: Riddle me this batman.... Post by Tony S on 09/09/13 at 08:27:08 2B36233525273229342F460 wrote:
Read my bold. Then analyse the attitude of YOUR extreme right "anti-abortionists" (who will gladly MURDER an abortionist gynecologist) the attitude of the "Creationists" (who INSIST the universe was created in 6 days as the Book of Genesis describes) the attitude of the State of Mississippi (whish ratified the Anti-Slavery Bill dated 1866 only last spring and the attitude of Southern Baptists in general, and Westboro Baptists in particular. Such attitudes would have been "kept under control" by the Judiciary System in Europe - we've had our share of extremism, thank you very much - but you guys seem to be much too permissive to realize there is a gap between "freedom of opinion" and imposing a minorioty's opinion on a peaceful majority. Now, please, research Blackwater Security Consulting, and ask yourself how on earth a privately owned company can be contracted to execute military missions for the CIA. In Europe, it would have been the MOD's job.[/quote] I miss the point of your post. If you are saying the Christian Fundamentalist extremists can be as dangerous as their Islamic counterparts - I agree If you are saying Southern Baptists are pretty conservative, I agree. As are the leaders and most followers of large, non denominational Evangelical churches. I know a fair number of Christians that fall into those two camps - SB and Evangelicals and they are not extremists with a violent bent. Just conservative. Creationists come in a lot of flavors. The great majority of Christians - for instance Methodists and Catholics - believe that God created the universe but the Biblical account of six days is symbolic and it is all cool with science. "The bible is literal in it's account of six days" type creationist is both in the minority and harmless. They like to open mueseums and pester school boards, but that's about it. I don't like the Blackwater Security thing. I don't understand why the US military contracts out a lot of things that they do. While the war was still being fought in Iraq we had private contractors hauling fuel in unguarded convoys to our troops and forward bases. Back to Blackwater - maybe in 20 years someone will write a book that explains a lot of whys and what for. Not having lived in Europe I cannot say how it is there. But the difference between Christian Extremists in the USA and Islamic Extremists in the Middle East and Africa are pretty easy to see. The Christian Extremists don't rule in America like they do in Iran. Nor do they have control of parts of the entire country where they have set up their own shadow goverment - judicial system, (religous) police, prevent females from attending school. etc as they have in say Afghanistan Nor do the Christian extremists in the USA even effectively, behind the scenes. call all the shots like say in Saudia Arabia. "Such attitudes" are kept under control her in the USA. While Individual acts of violence occur. America doesn't have Extremist Christian groups controlling parts of our country, nor are they destablizing our government or assisinating police, politicians and reporters that speak out against them. Instead the call themselves "Social conservatives" and along with the Tea party elect in the Republican primaries republican candidates that more closely represent their views. They enjoy success in the smaller, more conservative states especially at the local levels of government. They have actually hurt the republicans in the larger states and at the national level. I live in Indiana. Richard Lugar couldn't have lost his Senate seat in a general election to Mother Theresa. But a tea party/social conservative candidate beat him in the Republican primary - and then lost the general election in a State Romney easily carried. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |