By Fenderputty Go To Post
This isn't going to be messy at all. Nope. Not at all.
This is why people pinning a lack of intervention on Obama are insane. This is legit spark WWIII shit.
By livefromkyoto Go To PostThis is why people pinning a lack of intervention on Obama are insane. This is legit spark WWIII shit.
Yes and no. By the time people were calling on him to get involved it was too late, but this mess is a direct result of his foreign policy decisions over the course of 8 years.
By livefromkyoto Go To PostThis is why people pinning a lack of intervention on Obama are insane. This is legit spark WWIII shit.Obama could've jumped in loooooong before Russia established itself so deeply in Syria.
By Phlebas Go To PostThoughts on a potential draft if the whole situation blows up?There won't be a draft so it's not really worth discussing.
By Perfect Blue Go To PostThere won't be a draft so it's not really worth discussing.There's absolutely no way to know for sure
By Phlebas Go To PostThoughts on a potential draft if the whole situation blows up?Only way there's ever a Vietnam era draft again is if we start losing states lol
By Phlebas Go To PostThere's absolutely no way to know for sure
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostYes and no. By the time people were calling on him to get involved it was too late, but this mess is a direct result of his foreign policy decisions over the course of 8 years.
By DY_nasty Go To PostObama could've jumped in loooooong before Russia established itself so deeply in Syria.
You guys both know there was zero political will to do it at that point after he'd just gotten the country out of Afghanistan. And for good reason.
By livefromkyoto Go To PostYou guys both know there was zero political will to do it at that point after he'd just gotten the country out of Afghanistan. And for good reason.If Libya didn't happen I'd be all about that train of thought lol
By DY_nasty Go To PostIf Libya didn't happen I'd be all about that train of thought lol
But there were no (public) boots on the ground in Libya. Obama had air strikes on Syria too, but the kind of "stop it before it gets too late" intervention you guys are talking about would have meant a lot of troops going up directly against Assad and any other number of factions. And I'm quite sure there were back channel Soviet hints to stay away from their client state.
It was a time when nobody anywhere wanted to sign off on any more Middle East quagmires, and given the broader success of the Arab Spring elsewhere, it seemed like a more hands-off approach was the right way to go.
Clinton is such a hawk lol
Shed have given the Republicans full control of government eventually. She would have been terrible especially with Republican obstruction. Becoming glad that Trump is able to take the brunt of all this now instead.
Shed have given the Republicans full control of government eventually. She would have been terrible especially with Republican obstruction. Becoming glad that Trump is able to take the brunt of all this now instead.
By livefromkyoto Go To PostBut there were no (public) boots on the ground in Libya. Obama had air strikes on Syria too, but the kind of "stop it before it gets too late" intervention you guys are talking about would have meant a lot of troops going up directly against Assad and any other number of factions. And I'm quite sure there were back channel Soviet hints to stay away from their client state.
It was a time when nobody anywhere wanted to sign off on any more Middle East quagmires, and given the broader success of the Arab Spring elsewhere, it seemed like a more hands-off approach was the right way to go.
This is where you lose me. Arab Spring looked successful at the outset but foreign policy makers' jobs are to see 4, 5 even 6 steps ahead and plan accordingly.
It was clear that there was a good chance the entire region could destabilize and they had zero plans to deal with it.
By n8 dogg Go To PostTrump won't go along with it if it fucks off Russia surely
Lmao you think this isn't Russia's plan? This shit is way too convenient and as Americans we always like to feel like we're heroes which gets us to do stupid fucking shit. It's the #1 most trained reaction amongst Americans (due to a mental diet of Too many action movies)
We going to go in there ..... blow a Russian or two up in our Assad strikes and Russia's going to say "hey bro you broke that shit! You need to pay for it (drop Sanctions) or we're going to have a problem."
This will kick in the seconds most inherent American reaction..... being Chicken shit scared of somebody actually attacking US..... so we'll negotiate because that's easier and less scary than just replying "we'll nuke you back". Especially if his puppet is the president and can ease people into thinking this. Also all those impeach trials are going to slow down. All in all it's a desperate move and I am hoping some god damn Dems call this shit out sooner than later.
Putin dangled out the "invade Syria" option for a long time, he wants us to do it to give him the justification to threaten America with Nukes without us you know immediately just saying "Well we'll nuke you back comrade". Sort of makes sense too Trump doesn't even have a fully functional State department" and the us AG who might of kept the investigation going during the war....... all fired. It would lend themself to a scenario where he could "negotiate us back from a nuclear war...... by giving Russia exactly what it wants".
I feel something like this was always the plan, (and said so when he started beating the NK drums) Trump is the sort of small minded idiot that wants to be a war president especially if eventually they could of eventually used it to lower sanctions. They are just so damn scared of impeachment they are forced to do it way quicker than normal. This was probably on the schedule for year 2 or 3...... not 2 or 3 quarter of year 1. But the investigation is moving fast, if they don't try to do this now they might never have the chance.
Dems would be wise to vote down any sort of military action, regardless of result
There's no way this doesn't end horribly. And Clinton needs to shut the fuck up
There's no way this doesn't end horribly. And Clinton needs to shut the fuck up
By Phlebas Go To PostThere's absolutely no way to know for sure
Should we discuss all things that are extremely unlikely but also unknowable?
There are "boots on the ground" already in both places - the issue with reporting is that it's a VERY subjective metric.
But mostly... Naw lol
Our airstrikes and support pointed the removal of Gaddafi in a clear, pointed direction. Who's down for a regime change? You and you and you? Let's get it.
In Syria it was bullshiting, basically making it worse by riding the fence and throwing guns at people who weren't properly measured. "Sooooo we want ISIS dealt with, a pro-West, foundation reestablished, and Assad dealt with - fuck blurred lines, something good will happen because evil always loses. MAGA" It was a noncommittal, wishful thinking effort. Then the line in the sand - then it got crossed hard - then you let Russia of all countries broker the chemical weapons disarmament deal.
Its an L
But mostly... Naw lol
Our airstrikes and support pointed the removal of Gaddafi in a clear, pointed direction. Who's down for a regime change? You and you and you? Let's get it.
In Syria it was bullshiting, basically making it worse by riding the fence and throwing guns at people who weren't properly measured. "Sooooo we want ISIS dealt with, a pro-West, foundation reestablished, and Assad dealt with - fuck blurred lines, something good will happen because evil always loses. MAGA" It was a noncommittal, wishful thinking effort. Then the line in the sand - then it got crossed hard - then you let Russia of all countries broker the chemical weapons disarmament deal.
Its an L
By Dark PhaZe Go To PostClinton is such a hawk lolSame. Its kinda weird but I feel the same way so far.
Shed have given the Republicans full control of government eventually. She would have been terrible especially with Republican obstruction. Becoming glad that Trump is able to take the brunt of all this now instead.
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostThis is where you lose me. Arab Spring looked successful at the outset but foreign policy makers' jobs are to see 4, 5 even 6 steps ahead and plan accordingly.
It was clear that there was a good chance the entire region could destabilize and they had zero plans to deal with it.
This is revisionist history land. Nobody in Western intelligence communities could even agree who to back - there were no good guys there to side with; it wasn't even clear who had what backing. They didn't have a plan to deal with it because there wasn't one. Russia wouldn't sign off on UN occupation, so going in would have meant Coalition of the Willing part II. Except setting up a US pro-Western puppet regime had already failed in Afghanistan and Iraq, so nobody was going to sign off on it, especially without a ton of oil waiting at the end (Syria accounts for like 0.5% of global production).
Really, I want to know what magical solution you think Obama should have had. You think a Republican obstructionist congress was going to sign off on an Obama ground war? You think the public would have backed it while they were still reeling from the financial crisis and disillusioned by the Bush adventures?
I'd like to think that this will be the time that the broader public will be strongly against military action. War fatigue, a hated president, and a vague cause... I don't see this rallying anyone.
By DY_nasty Go To PostThey didn't agree but backed them anyways
The right solution was to go hard or not at all
But we know congress would have told Obama no if he asked them for the time of day. So then it comes down to doing nothing...given the number of foreign actors involved, it's hard to argue that limited US intervention was what tipped the scales. Assad was about to tumble before Russia stepped in and propped him up rather than lose a client state. I dunno, I don't give Obama a pass for everything he did militarily, a lot of things about the way the War on Terror was prosecuted throughout his term were not right. But in this instance, I just don't see what he was supposed to do.
And going hard now...entering war where you're suddenly the fourth major faction, with foreign-funded & manned ISIS fighting an asymmetric war on one side & a Russian proxy with chemical weapons on the other is crazy town.
Like, Trump's the guy who's going to figure this out?
RE: cuck(oldry).
I was just scanning bUT I think y'all missed the fact that this is a sub-genre in IR porn, usually a well-endowed black man "breeding" a white woman as her husband watches (feebly). He might even orally drain the creampie.
Should inform you a bit more on the implications when someone is called a cuck...or uses the term. There are layers to this.
I was just scanning bUT I think y'all missed the fact that this is a sub-genre in IR porn, usually a well-endowed black man "breeding" a white woman as her husband watches (feebly). He might even orally drain the creampie.
Should inform you a bit more on the implications when someone is called a cuck...or uses the term. There are layers to this.
By livefromkyoto Go To PostLike, Trump's the guy who's going to figure this out?He'll blunder in and say "who knew the Middle East was so complicated?" when things go to hell.
By livefromkyoto Go To PostThis is revisionist history land. Nobody in Western intelligence communities could even agree who to back - there were no good guys there to side with; it wasn't even clear who had what backing. They didn't have a plan to deal with it because there wasn't one. Russia wouldn't sign off on UN occupation, so going in would have meant Coalition of the Willing part II. Except setting up a US pro-Western puppet regime had already failed in Afghanistan and Iraq, so nobody was going to sign off on it, especially without a ton of oil waiting at the end (Syria accounts for like 0.5% of global production).
Really, I want to know what magical solution you think Obama should have had. You think a Republican obstructionist congress was going to sign off on an Obama ground war? You think the public would have backed it while they were still reeling from the financial crisis and disillusioned by the Bush adventures?
I think we're tiptoeing around the move that was probably the most expedient path to peace....
By Dark PhaZe Go To PostClinton is such a hawk lol
Shed have given the Republicans full control of government eventually. She would have been terrible especially with Republican obstruction. Becoming glad that Trump is able to take the brunt of all this now instead.
Are you so prepared to dance on the graves of dead soldiers already just to make #45 look bad?
By Phlebas Go To Post
At least we got Zelda before the world came crashing down around our ears.
By Fenderputty Go To PostWell there, it is. I'm not saying we shouldn't do this. Just … this admin, man.
Yeah, taking out their ability to deliver chemical strikes on civilians is good, but he's the last guy I trust to keep this situation in check. If you're the Russians/China, it would burn you so hard to have to take Ls from that guy. You'd feel absolutely compelled to respond somehow.
By KingGondo Go To PostNo worries everyone, I'm sure this was well thought out over a luxurious meal at Mar-a-Lago.
He met with his team there right before he had dinner with Xi. I'm sure part of this was a power play/theatre in advance of that.
By Fenderputty Go To PostWell there, it is. I'm not saying we shouldn't do this. Just … this admin, man.
Basically.
By Phoenix RISING Go To PostAre you so prepared to dance on the graves of dead soldiers already just to make #45 look bad?More like people don't mind dead soldiers if they can get behind a good cause, feel good about the leadership, and (now) want the endgame to be legit for these bigger movements.
Shit don't add up right now.
trump think he playing command and conquer right now
the chain reaction from this is....gonna be something to see
the chain reaction from this is....gonna be something to see
So apparently the Russian's shot down 11 of the missiles fired..... because they aren't still very active in the region.
And I still think this is a collusion of forces to make Trump look better
And I still think this is a collusion of forces to make Trump look better
First decent thing Trump has done since taking office. We should have done this long before this.
Russians were warned ahead of time we were doing this. There were Russian personnel at that base, so its safe to say they warned the Syrians and no critical military assets (aircraft) were left there by the time the Tomahawks hit it, which is a shame but unavoidable.
Now lets reduce the rest of Assad's air bases to rubble.
Russians were warned ahead of time we were doing this. There were Russian personnel at that base, so its safe to say they warned the Syrians and no critical military assets (aircraft) were left there by the time the Tomahawks hit it, which is a shame but unavoidable.
Now lets reduce the rest of Assad's air bases to rubble.
By Enron Go To PostFirst decent thing Trump has done since taking office. We should have done this long before this.
Russians were warned ahead of time we were doing this. There were Russian personnel at that base, so its safe to say they warned the Syrians and no critical military assets (aircraft) were left there by the time the Tomahawks hit it, which is a shame but unavoidable.
Now lets reduce the rest of Assad's air bases to rubble.
So we told Putin who then told Assad...... Yeah nothing fishy about that...... This shit is such a wag the dog move its disgusting.
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the use of chemical weapons was orchestrated so Trump could do this and shift the attention to attacking Syria. What a shit world we live in
By Zeus Ex Machina Go To PostSo we told Putin who then told Assad…… Yeah nothing fishy about that…… This shit is such a wag the dog move its disgusting.
Considering that the Russians have personnel stationed at probably every Syrian military facility, it's a no-brainer. This is more about sending Assad a message. I don't believe it was wagging the dog at all...unless you are saying that the adminstration conspired with the Russians and the Syrians to gas these people so Trump could retaliate like crazy Eichele just did. Come on, you guys have seen too many movies.
By KingGondo Go To PostWhat's the end goal, Enron?
The end goal is probably the same as before. I doubt there are any boots on the ground or any extended bombing campaigns in the works, its just a punitive strike for something egregious.
Remember that time we contributed to a massive humanitarian crisis while simultaneously defunding our own international humanitarian aid programs?
We should not be taking the lead here. Unfortunately, we should let those people die and allow things in the region to play out. The shitty voting population in the US won't want to see any type of engagement through beyond dropping bombs and then walking away.
We should not be taking the lead here. Unfortunately, we should let those people die and allow things in the region to play out. The shitty voting population in the US won't want to see any type of engagement through beyond dropping bombs and then walking away.
Enron: No, I mean what's *your* ideal end goal in a country like Syria?
We're telling Assad "if you're gonna kill your own people with the aid of Russia just make sure to only use conventional weapons."
And Tillerson is talking about regime change.
This will not be all we do, especially as soon as Trump sees the breathless wall-to-wall coverage on cable news.
We're telling Assad "if you're gonna kill your own people with the aid of Russia just make sure to only use conventional weapons."
And Tillerson is talking about regime change.
This will not be all we do, especially as soon as Trump sees the breathless wall-to-wall coverage on cable news.