Syria getting ugly in a hurry

txa1265 · August 31, 2013

dteowner said:
Not quite apples-to-apples. At a minimum, we had Saddam dead to rights on gassing the Kurds. He also had a history of open aggression with his invasion of Kuwait. Whether you bought the WMD deal or not, there's no denying that Saddam was a dangerous lunatic whose rhetoric would lead anyone listening to conclude that he had no intentions of playing nice.

Well, of course so long as we also realize that the ever-crumbling image of Reagan (trickle down economics is the single largest source of our economic problems) includes supporting, funding, supplying and providing intelligence to iRaq in order that they could use chemical weapons ...

dteowner · August 31, 2013

txa1265 said:
Well, of course so long as we also realize that the ever-crumbling image of Reagan (trickle down economics is the single largest source of our economic problems) includes supporting, funding, supplying and providing intelligence to iRaq in order that they could use chemical weapons …

The "failure" of Reag-onomics depends on your views of two things- whether you foolishly believe that government is as efficient spending money as industry, and whether you prefer equal results or equal opportunity.

I would point out that you're clearly down on direct intervention as policy but you're also down on intervention by proxy. Unless you're one of those loons that believes that the whole world really wants to get along if given half a chance, you can't really be against both approaches.

txa1265 · August 31, 2013

dteowner said:
The "failure" of Reag-onomics depends on your views of two things- whether you foolishly believe that government is as efficient spending money as industry, and whether you prefer equal results or equal opportunity.

I would point out that you're clearly down on direct intervention as policy but you're also down on intervention by proxy. Unless you're one of those loons that believes that the whole world really wants to get along if given half a chance, you can't really be against both approaches.

The core issue (we're getting off topic here) is that every policy and law is crafted to favor a very narrow group of people. Those people are very good at accumulating wealth - NOT spending, and not giving it back to the government. But that accumulation serves an unintended consequence of removing money from those outside of that 'ruling class/1%/whatever'. The old expression 'the rich get richer, the poor get poorer' is true.

Then the government tries to intervene, because they constantly see an increasing concentration of wealth in a smaller and smaller pool of people ... which has two issues (1) the government sucks at ... well, pretty much everything, and (2) fearful of losing their wealth, the rich people fight a proxy war using lower class Christian white people who are easily stirred into fear of anyone different to form a blockade of government action.

Also, when you have the lowest 'income elasticity' of any 1st world country (i.e. if you are a millionaire, there is a >75% chance your great-great-grandchildren will also be millionaires (percentage compounding from the initial >95%), likewise if you are below the poverty line it is fairly well assured your great-great-grandchildren will be as well) ... there is NO 'equal opportunity'. And that is the issue - I think 'equal results' is some utopian pipe-dream which would implode when we realize our government would only have a slightly better 'is water wet' determination (which would only get a result because of spying on a private company) ... so I think the only real possibility is an 'equal opportunity' - but as I mention there is a class/race proxy war being fought that will not allow for real equality of opportunity to exist.

Drithius · August 31, 2013

What I dislike most about this situation is our waffling back and forth with action or inaction. For fuck sakes, take a stand and do something - or don't. Don't walk the line in the middle, preaching about red lines being crossed while not bothering to do shit.

The latest development is just more of the same: the President is talking tough… but we'll wait for Congress. Congress is on vacation for another 9 days - LOL. It's just pathetic. If you're serious, call an emergency session and decide now - today. Be decisive for once.

Moriendor · September 1, 2013

I am very surprised that the US hasn't struck in "shock & awe" fashion almost immediately. Not like they have a lack of cruise missile capable sea and air craft in the area and Syria must have been on the target evaluation list for years now. Nope. There must be something going on in intelligence/diplomatic circles that is not meant for the public.

At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy nut case once again

I believe that this chemical gas attack was executed by an interested party but not by the Syrian regime. Assad's an asshole but not a retard.
Could have been anyone from Israel hoping to provoke a US response to strengthen its position in the middle East to North Korea, China or Russia testing the waters just how toothless the former tiger USA has become after the all but lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (yes, I know… Saddam and OBL are dead but both regions are far from stable and the US has long adopted a policy of "how do we cut our insane expenses and get out w/o losing face?" than actually trying to "win" anything).

There's something very fishy here. If Barack Obama had 100% proof and 100% zero doubt that Assad was behind the attacks, I'm sure he would have greenlighted (limited) cruise missile strikes on strategic targets within 24 hours. Why wouldn't he? Would have been a very popular move with the American public to demonstrate American strength. The UN would have boo'ed but since when does America give a fuck about the UN? China and Russia would have boo'ed a little louder but well… —> see UN.

No, there must be something going on behind the curtains here. The Brits and the US probably know very well that this wasn't Assad but you can't exactly reveal the treacherous activities of possibly even an allied (Israel?) nation either so the Brits and the US are playing the time card now until everyone has cooled down and a response no longer seems necessary or they are feverishly looking for airtight evidence who was behind this. At the same time the (suspected) originators of the attack are being sent a very clear message in intelligence and diplomatic circles to never even think about doing this again.

Corwin · September 1, 2013

Mo, the only thing I want to say is that Israel has been blamed for many things, but something like that is contrary to everything they stand for. They rarely get much good press, but they would never countenance chemical warfare against civilians. You have no idea just how much humanitarian aid/work Israel does without ever getting any credit.

ManWhoJaped · September 1, 2013

Thrasher said:
We should stay out. Period. No need to make up excuses or lies for why it would be good to do otherwise.

Of this, and everything. No loans or support to anyone for any reason, to any country, just some medical supplies maybe.

GothicGothicness · September 1, 2013

Well, my hope is that the idea with the warships is the following:

"We're serious keep acting like that and you'll be in trouble"

It might be enough to Place them there to have the guys quit, or at least be a bit careful.

If they are not the least bit scared and don't care and continue in the same way with chemical weapons and mass killings, well in that case I think probably quite some people would turn around in their opinion about this.

ManWhoJaped · September 1, 2013

Moriendor said:
I am very surprised that the US hasn't struck in "shock & awe" fashion almost immediately. Not like they have a lack of cruise missile capable sea and air craft in the area and Syria must have been on the target evaluation list for years now. Nope. There must be something going on in intelligence/diplomatic circles that is not meant for the public.

At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy nut case once again I believe that this chemical gas attack was executed by an interested party but not by the Syrian regime. Assad's an asshole but not a retard.
Could have been anyone from Israel hoping to provoke a US response to strengthen its position in the middle East to North Korea, China or Russia testing the waters just how toothless the former tiger USA has become after the all but lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (yes, I know… Saddam and OBL are dead but both regions are far from stable and the US has long adopted a policy of "how do we cut our insane expenses and get out w/o losing face?" than actually trying to "win" anything).

There's something very fishy here. If Barack Obama had 100% proof and 100% zero doubt that Assad was behind the attacks, I'm sure he would have greenlighted (limited) cruise missile strikes on strategic targets within 24 hours. Why wouldn't he? Would have been a very popular move with the American public to demonstrate American strength. The UN would have boo'ed but since when does America give a fuck about the UN? China and Russia would have boo'ed a little louder but well… —> see UN.

No, there must be something going on behind the curtains here. The Brits and the US probably know very well that this wasn't Assad but you can't exactly reveal the treacherous activities of possibly even an allied (Israel?) nation either so the Brits and the US are playing the time card now until everyone has cooled down and a response no longer seems necessary or they are feverishly looking for airtight evidence who was behind this. At the same time the (suspected) originators of the attack are being sent a very clear message in intelligence and diplomatic circles to never even think about doing this again.

Assad has to be quite desperate.

I don't think Israel would be that stupid because it's a geographically small country and it would not take much to eradicate it if chemical weapons or nukes come to play. And if things continue on I expect it will happen some day.

Also I don't think Obama is very pro Israel and in general black community really isn't. Actually no one seems to be any more except american politicians who have been payed pac money. I used to be pretty pro Israel but it seems to have dried up in time as I see how much money we waste on it.

Drithius · September 1, 2013

Israel makes for a great fighter jet customer.

zahratustra · September 1, 2013

ManWhoJaped said:
Assad has to be quite desperate.

Trouble is that until that attack he had no reason to be desperate. Now he has…
I don't think that Israel could have anything to do with this but, maybe, somebody high up in Syrian army went rogue?

ManWhoJaped · September 1, 2013

Drithius said:
Israel makes for a great fighter jet customer.

I don't mind selling to them, if they pay for them. Instead they use money they "borrow" from the US government to purchase them from US companies. The companies and Israel both lobby congressmen to get the loans. So we are just giving them away, tab so far is close to american national debt.

Zaleukos · September 1, 2013

I suspect that the attack was carried out by Syrian army commanders acting on their own initiative. Assad is not in full control of his forces. The rebels dont have the hardware to deliver such a large scale attack.

Obama would rather stay out, but since he has said that a red line is drawn at chemical weapons he's bound to do something or his administration would be taken as (even more of according to dte?) a paper tiger by the US' enemies. The US (and probably France, Hollande is much like Sarko desperate for martial glory) will lob a few cruise missiles at stationary Syrian military targets. These will possibly be deserted since the regime has had time to cover it's tracks. Depending on how good US sigint is the missiles might even hit a chemical weapons stockpile or two. At any rate it wont have much immediate impact on the conflict.

He'd probably be quite relieved if there was proof that the attack had been carried out by some obscure rebel group that the regime already wiped out.

dteowner · September 1, 2013

Drithius said:
The latest development is just more of the same: the President is talking tough… but we'll wait for Congress. Congress is on vacation for another 9 days - LOL. It's just pathetic. If you're serious, call an emergency session and decide now - today. Be decisive for once.

Hopey Peace Prize overstepped his constitutional and statutory authority with the way he handled Libya and he knows it. He could have been impeached (whether that would have been best for the country overall is debatable). I expect he's playing this one by the book because he's probably been reminded of that little detail. Plus, it's a brilliant political maneuver. He gets a road to back out of his ill-advised chest thumping without looking like a complete moron, and if it happens to go to shit in Syria over the next week due to his waffling he can blame congress for the inaction.

Zaleukos · September 1, 2013

Syria wont get much worse all of a sudden unless both sides start using gas indiscriminately.

Pretty much every other atrocity you can think of is already taking place there. Artillery shelling and air bombardment of residential areas, massacres of opposing ethnic/religious groups, Iran, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda having boots on the ground, fighting spilling over into neighbouring countries (Lebanon), the odd rocket fired into Israel, ritual cannibalism etc....

txa1265 · September 1, 2013

dteowner said:
Hopey Peace Prize

I always read that as 'Hopey McPeace Prize' because for me it feels like he got it in the box with his 'first day in office Happy ... errm, Hopey Meal!

Moriendor · September 2, 2013

Corwin said:
Mo, the only thing I want to say is that Israel has been blamed for many things, but something like that is contrary to everything they stand for. They rarely get much good press, but they would never countenance chemical warfare against civilians. You have no idea just how much humanitarian aid/work Israel does without ever getting any credit.

I agree on the humanitarian part and I'm not suggesting that Israel is generally the prime overlord of evil

.
But when it comes to pursuing their interests and in their endless struggle for survival, they are known to be completely ruthless and merciless.
From bulldozing all over Palestinian settlements to build their own to shutting down water and electricity in Palestinian areas at will to bombarding Palestinian refugee camps full of unarmed civilians under the pretense of their own war on terror (= a very popular excuse to kill, maim, torture or arrest indefinitely w/o trial innocents in certain nations of this world)... Israel has a track record of showing very little restraint when it comes to applying violence in order to forcefully pursue their interests.
I mean if even hardened Israeli air force pilots who are used to very liberally deploying their payloads go public in an effort to stop the Palestinian genocide then you know that Israel is not exactly a "Hopey Peace Price" country

.
So in essence, I have no doubt that Mossad would execute an attack on Syrian civilians like this if it served Israeli interests.

Drithius · September 2, 2013

Helping anyone is hardly the point anymore.

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.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Click to expand...

-source, a five-star general of note.

dteowner · September 3, 2013

Wonderful timing by Israel, who appear content to pour gasoline on the fire:
http://news.yahoo.com/russia-says-ballistic-objects-fired-mediterranean-090528639.html

The morning launch was first reported by Moscow media that quoted Russian defense officials as saying two ballistic "objects" had been fired eastward from the center of the sea - roughly in the direction of Syria.

Arrow designer Uzi Rabin said tests of the anti-missile system are planned "long, long in advance" and generally go unnoticed. "What apparently made the difference today is the high state of tension over Syria and Russia's unusual vigilance," he told Reuters.

dteowner · September 3, 2013

Gotta love being a global laughingstock. Well done, Hopey.

http://news.yahoo.com/mideast-view-u-hesitant-superpower-sharpens-142140754.html

At the same time, Hashimi said, Obama's move was confusing for many in the region and represented "a retreat".

Mohammed Yassin, a 45-year-old Palestinian in Gaza said Obama did not look like the "tough guy Bush was". Employing an Arab nickname for Obama, derived from his Kenyan father's name, Yassin said, smiling: "Abu Hussein has no balls."

They warn it would undermine the credibility of the United States in the Middle East and around the world if Congress does not approve his deployment of military force in Syria.

Anthony Cordesman of Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies wrote that Obama had to show real leadership, "not overreaction, sudden reversal and uncertainty".

A diplomat based in Tehran said the Iranian government had seen Obama's decision as U.S. weakness. The first reaction from Iranian officials was one of "glee", the diplomat said.

Syria getting ugly in a hurry

SasqWatch

Shoegazer

SasqWatch

Magic & Loss

Excommunicado

On The Razorblade of Life

Keeper of the Watch

SasqWatch

Keeper of the Watch

Magic & Loss

SasqWatch

Keeper of the Watch

Bum

Shoegazer

Bum

SasqWatch

Excommunicado

Magic & Loss

Shoegazer

Shoegazer