How good do you all think the intelligence on the ground in Syria that the US has actually is?
Iran is your best friend in the region
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
Stupid ass shit like this is why I left the Army.
Good people are going to die because Obama talked smack to impress . . . someone, got called on it, and now has to go fight in the schoolyard after the bell. In short, Obama is trapped in Junior High level of maturity.
Look, I fought in both Iraq and Afganistan. Our enemy is Iran. (Not Russia, not China, they’re just trying to maintain influence and don’t care with whom.)
These proxy fucking wars are stupid. Vietnam taught us that. Korea should have taught us that.
If you go into a war, go in heavy, or don’t go in at all.
Either bring this to Iran, or fucking stay out of it.
[/quote]
[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
Iran is your best friend in the region
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
Stupid ass shit like this is why I left the Army.
Good people are going to die because Obama talked smack to impress . . . someone, got called on it, and now has to go fight in the schoolyard after the bell. In short, Obama is trapped in Junior High level of maturity.
Look, I fought in both Iraq and Afganistan. Our enemy is Iran. (Not Russia, not China, they’re just trying to maintain influence and don’t care with whom.)
These proxy fucking wars are stupid. Vietnam taught us that. Korea should have taught us that.
If you go into a war, go in heavy, or don’t go in at all.
Either bring this to Iran, or fucking stay out of it.
[/quote]
[/quote]
yeah, that’s why the IED that gave me second degree burns along basically one entire side of my body through a light armor fucking Humvee and body armor was made in Iran.
Because they’re our bestest friends forever.
Please.
Go back to fucking goats or whatever you do for fun. Maybe throw some rocks at a suspected witch.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
Can someone explain to me why we feel the need to try and share democracy anyways? It seems to be working out so incredibly well for us here. And good luck sharing it with Russia and China, or do we no longer bother with them because we know its a lost cause?[/quote]
Who feels the need to share democracy?
The Joint Chiefs don’t sit around that big table in the Pentagon talking about how best to share democracy.
The State Department doesn’t map out the best policies for sharing democracy in the next decade.
The Army and the Navy and the Marine Corps and the Air Force are not fighting so that more democracy may be shared.
The only people who talk about sharing democracy are people who are paid with taxpayer dollars to say things such as this in front of television cameras for people who don’t really understand democracy but think that sharing it with people in other countries who don’t have it would be a pretty good idea.
What we offer other people a share of is our business model, our debt, and our protection. The Russians and the Chinese have no use of the third, have too much of the second, and are outdoing us already at the first. [/quote]
Sometimes I wish we had a Like button here at T-Nation.
This is spot on.
“This red line was not set by me, but the entire world…”
- Obama
He is now trying to claim he is doing the world’s bidding while no one else has skin in the game.
I think should have an amendment, any politician willing to vote for war should have their own child sent to the front lines.
Sick and tired of seeing my everyday people’s getting sent off and killed because some stupid ass ran his mouth to flaunt his ego.
I knew it was a matter of time, but Obama’s big mouth would come back to bite him in the ass. His weakness is his ego.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
“This red line was not set by me, but the entire world…”
- Obama
[/quote]
I heard that today. Absolutely ridiculous.
[quote]kamui wrote:
If Assad falls, the regime that will replace him will get his WMD.
Maybe we should actually try to destroy them before they get shipped all over the Ummah.
[/quote]
If this was the goal, then Obama would not have opposed strikes on the convoys of this crap that came from Iraq.
Nor would he have, as noted by other posters, opposed Bush’s effort to go after the root cause — Iran.
This is just ego; Obama is thin-skinned and looks like the pussy that he is.
His face-saving solution is to make an expensive fireworks show, risk a broad war (say, by accidently blowing up a Russian ship — that stuff happens), risk the lives of US Marines and Airmen, and basically do nothing to change the situation.
My elder daughters are all called up for active duty right now; I can’t say I am pleased this shit is going down so near my home.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
“This red line was not set by me, but the entire world…”
- Obama
[/quote]
I heard that today. Absolutely ridiculous.
[/quote]
Translation: “The buck? What buck? Oh, THAT buck?! Well, um, er, it stops . . over there!”
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
“This red line was not set by me, but the entire world…”
- Obama
[/quote]
I heard that today. Absolutely ridiculous.
[/quote]
How so? It is in the Geneva convention, the UN charter and has been in place for every modern president. I’m not saying he hasn’t waffled but he didn’t create the policy against chemical weapons.
Personally I think it is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
If Assad falls, the regime that will replace him will get his WMD.
Maybe we should actually try to destroy them before they get shipped all over the Ummah.
[/quote]
If this was the goal, then Obama would not have opposed strikes on the convoys of this crap that came from Iraq.
Nor would he have, as noted by other posters, opposed Bush’s effort to go after the root cause — Iran.
This is just ego; Obama is thin-skinned and looks like the pussy that he is.
His face-saving solution is to make an expensive fireworks show, risk a broad war (say, by accidently blowing up a Russian ship — that stuff happens), risk the lives of US Marines and Airmen, and basically do nothing to change the situation.
My elder daughters are all called up for active duty right now; I can’t say I am pleased this shit is going down so near my home.[/quote]
You and I are on the same page. I am not a Hebrew, but America better have Israel’s back if the shit hits the fan. I dont think Obama will have Israel’s back. He would join Syria if they attack Israel.
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
“This red line was not set by me, but the entire world…”
- Obama
[/quote]
I heard that today. Absolutely ridiculous.
[/quote]
How so? It is in the Geneva convention, the UN charter and has been in place for every modern president. I’m not saying he hasn’t waffled but he didn’t create the policy against chemical weapons.
Personally I think it is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.
[/quote]
Now you are just kidding yourself. The Geneva convention did set this. But Obama stated very clearly that using chemical weapons was a line in the sand. There is proof that Assad has used Chemical weapons multiple times, I have heard 100 times, in this civil war. Obama did nothing, now all of a sudden it is not HIS fault, but the rest of the world’s fault. If he is so convinced why is he waiting? Make the call he is the Commander in Chief. Why did he not call back congress immediately?
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
“This red line was not set by me, but the entire world…”
- Obama
[/quote]
I heard that today. Absolutely ridiculous.
[/quote]
How so? It is in the Geneva convention, the UN charter and has been in place for every modern president. I’m not saying he hasn’t waffled but he didn’t create the policy against chemical weapons.
Personally I think it is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.
[/quote]
Now you are just kidding yourself. The Geneva convention did set this. But Obama stated very clearly that using chemical weapons was a line in the sand. There is proof that Assad has used Chemical weapons multiple times, I have heard 100 times, in this civil war. Obama did nothing, now all of a sudden it is not HIS fault, but the rest of the world’s fault. If he is so convinced why is he waiting? Make the call he is the Commander in Chief. Why did he not call back congress immediately?
[/quote]
Wait, so you have seen this proof? Hundreds of times? Thats bullshit, there has been ONE incident that I have seen reported on and the UN has been urging the united states to wait until the evidence is in conclusively. Aside from that he had to make his case to congress, which means he has to convince them to go along with him on something when they nearly always do the opposite.
He should have just said he was strongly opposed and they would be lobbing missiles as we speak just to spite him.
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
“This red line was not set by me, but the entire world…”
- Obama
[/quote]
I heard that today. Absolutely ridiculous.
[/quote]
How so? It is in the Geneva convention, the UN charter and has been in place for every modern president. I’m not saying he hasn’t waffled but he didn’t create the policy against chemical weapons.
Personally I think it is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.
[/quote]
Now you are just kidding yourself. The Geneva convention did set this. But Obama stated very clearly that using chemical weapons was a line in the sand. There is proof that Assad has used Chemical weapons multiple times, I have heard 100 times, in this civil war. Obama did nothing, now all of a sudden it is not HIS fault, but the rest of the world’s fault. If he is so convinced why is he waiting? Make the call he is the Commander in Chief. Why did he not call back congress immediately?
[/quote]
Wait, so you have seen this proof? Hundreds of times? Thats bullshit, there has been ONE incident that I have seen reported on and the UN has been urging the united states to wait until the evidence is in conclusively. Aside from that he had to make his case to congress, which means he has to convince them to go along with him on something when they nearly always do the opposite.
He should have just said he was strongly opposed and they would be lobbing missiles as we speak just to spite him.[/quote]
If he kept his mouth shut, there would be no case to be made to Congress.
If anything, he could have called on Congress first.
The teachable moment here is for Obama to learn.
A man who feels he is solely justified to send our people to war without consoling others is a reason why he should not be in power.
[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
Isn’t that one of the reasons claimed for Iraq, so that the people could elect their own leader and to remove a dictator? Isn’t that also the big to do in Egypt, about them finally being able to elect a leader, seeing it didn’t really work out, and wanting a second go at it?
Not being argumentative, just asking as I seem to recall those phrases being thrown around a lot. Most likely by our lovely media.[/quote]
With apologies to Adam Baldwin,
“Flush out your headgear, new guy. This isn’t about democracy; this is a slaughter. If I’m gonna get my balls blown off for a word, my word is ‘poontang’”.
The idea of a nation expending blood and treasure to protect democracy in another country where it is threatened, or to build it where it doesn’t exist, is as big a crock of shit now as it was when Woodrow Asshat Wilson said it a hundred years ago, and probably when Pericles or some other Athenian dweeb said it twenty-five hundred years ago.
We invest money, resources and the lives of our young men and women in international adventures that we imagine will be profitable. We go to war for the same reasons every expansive, aggressive empire has always gone to war for: to procure territory, trading rights, resources, slaves, and political influence which will guarantee them far into the future.
When Saddam Hussein did business with us, he was our friend. Ditto Muommar Gaddaffi, Hosni Mubarak, Bashar al-Assad, Manuel Noriega and Osama bin Laden. Once their activities were no longer contributing to our bottom line, they could be phased out. We are seeing this process at work right now in Syria.
The Syrian (or Egyptian, or Iraqi, or Afghan, or Lybian) people’s right of self-determination is worth precisely zero in the current political and military calculation.
Any word to the contrary is spoken either by someone extremely idealistic and naive, or by someone paid by somebody to say it, in order to deceive and distract idealistically naive people.
^ In my top 5 of all time favorite movies.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee approves use of force by 10-7 vote.
“STOCKHOLM ? President Obama declared on Wednesday that the confrontation with Syria over chemical weapons was not a personal test for him but for Congress, the United States and the world as he worked to strengthen support at home and abroad for a punitive strike.”
Of course not. POTUS isn’t responsible for anything except his golf score. Unbelievable!
He added, ?My credibility?s not on the line. The international community?s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress?s credibility is on the line.?
^Everyone except me, shocking.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^Everyone except me, shocking. [/quote]
I fucking knew his ego was going to get him in trouble, I only wish it was limited to his own personal trouble.