@Lash,
Lash wrote:You do know about the competing pipelines running through Syria; whose pipeline (& partnership) Assad prefers...?
Anything that accuses America of wrongdoing over pipelines can safely be disregarded as propaganda.
@blatham,
First of all, how do you know that "some 1500 tons of chemical weapons were removed from Syria?" Because the Russians told us so?
I don't know about Olivier, but I'm pretty damned confident that if Assad thought using those weapons would have resulted in 59 cruise missiles reigning down on him (with more to come if necessary) he wouldn't have used them again.
And you don't agree?
@tsarstepan,
tsarstepan wrote:Lash wrote:oralloy wrote:Sturgis wrote:I did complain about the drone killings under Obama.
Why? Dead terrorists are good terrorists.
We've killed a lot of women and children. Their sons and brothers are coming for you.
Yeah. That's the best way to grow a bumper crop of terrorists.
I hate to sound bloodthirsty, but I'm still really pissed off over 9/11. If we keep on killing them until we've killed so many that they run out of people to attack us with, I'll be pleased with that outcome.
@tsarstepan,
This argument is nonsensical unless you favor a totally isolationist policy wherein the US withdraws totally from the rest of the world.
Even then the US, thanks to social media, is the envy of the world, and envy inspires hatred.
@oralloy,
We don't need to preemptively kill them off. We have the means to exact enough punishment to those foolish enough to test us.
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:Gaddafi was never a "Good Guy, but he was a lot less crazed than the other megalomaniacs in that region of the world. Once Reagan spanked him hard he became content with dictating to Libyans.
First he perpetrated the Lockerbie Pan Am 103 bombing. Then he settled down.
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:We don't need to preemptively kill them off. We have the means to exact enough punishment to those foolish enough to test us.
The killing isn't preemptive. 9/11 happened. We've been tested. Now it's time to extract punishment.
@blatham,
Quote:How confident are you that had Obama launched an attack that those weapons would not have been used subsequently?
I think Assad understands the language of force. Maybe I'm wrong. Let's see what he does now.
@Finn dAbuzz,
That's my point. It's not the behavior of someone who has reason to fear being exposed by Russia. I never said the guy was being blackmailed - how the hell would I know??
@Finn dAbuzz,
He's presiding over a civil war with a blizzard of crazy players.
It's almost impossible to tell who's doing what. I think others have a GREAT deal to gain by setting Assad up. More to gain than Assad.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines
Old but relevant.
My wild guess take on the Syria soap opera so far:
- Putin and Trump are playing us big time.
- The Russian warship now between the US destroyers and the Assad military base boils down to a pseudo escalation to take off some heat from the Trump Russia connection.
- The attack on the Syrian people is partially fault of the rebels and Putin that reacted to the S. Petersburg attack by bombing a rebel depot witch had gas Sarin. (No Sarin coming to Russia prompted Puttin discarding Assad)
- I don't buy it yet that Assad would commit Hara-kiri with the war already won.
@Lash,
Lash wrote:He's presiding over a civil war with a blizzard of crazy players.
The entire civil war was caused by Assad deciding to massacre the Syrian people.
All of those "crazy players" were intentionally created
by Assad in order to distract the world from his atrocities.
@oralloy,
Interesting take on it.
I'm going to assume that Russia isn't happy about the air strike. I don't think that Putin gives a damn about the human rights angle. But if it turns out that they don't care you'll be able to point out that I heard it here first.
Just to show you how diabolically clever Putin is, he said that U.S./Russian relationships were already "in tatters" even before Trump fucked up their air base in Syria, eh?
He should be thanking Trump for giving them a 30-minute warning. Russian convoys were seen leaving like bats out of hell. Russia noted that Trump did not "ask their permission," though, and I guess they aint likin that.
@hightor,
hightor wrote:That's my point. It's not the behavior of someone who has reason to fear being exposed by Russia.
Indeed. Trump has nothing to fear from any of this Russia nonsense.
@hightor,
hightor wrote:Interesting take on it.
I'm going to assume that Russia isn't happy about the air strike. I don't think that Putin gives a damn about the human rights angle. But if it turns out that they don't care you'll be able to point out that I heard it here first.
I'm sure Putin doesn't care about human rights. But he does care about Russia's image.
Putin's problem with Assad isn't so much that civilians are being slaughtered, but rather that Russia is being publicly castigated in the UN.
My thesis. This attack on Syria - that is, Trump's decision to launch it - is all about domestic politics.
1) Just last week, Tillerson said that Assad's fate was to be "decided by the Syrian people". Given the incredible suffering that has been going on for years (you know, "babies being killed" by the thousands, not to mention toddlers and teenagers and adults and grandmothers) this present 180 degree turn makes no sense in terms of the context of Trump/Tillerson's argument - that this is a humanitarian action.
2) If there was an over-riding humanitarian motive here, we'd have seen some hint of it previously but what we have actually seen is an administration who would have set up barbed wire fences to keep Syrian refugees out of the US.
3) This action, as I mentioned earlier, provides something like an ideal situation for Trump as regards diverting media attention away from the many Trump campaign and administration investigations on-going and it frames Trump as oppositional to Putin and Russia which counters the perceptions of ties and affinities between them (for which there is much evidence).
4) The present apparent dissent within the Trump camp which seems to be pushing Bannon (and Bannonism) out of the limelight and replacing it with Kushner and a more traditional Republican worldview (in appearance, at least) to the foreground. My guess is that it was becoming increasingly evident through polling and other metrics that the course of the administration had to be changed dramatically in order to salvage Trump and electoral hopes in 2018.
Things to watch now are what happens with Bannon. Also, how Trump and the GOP play this story. I find no reason at all to presume any of these people give a **** about victims of war in Syria. I find many reasons to presume this action is just public relations.
@oralloy,
Quote:I would not be surprised to learn that whatever forewarning Russia had of these missile strikes, they decided to keep it to themselves and not pass it along to Assad.
I've read they must have passed on the message to Syrians because the airport was evacuated before the strike.
@Fil Albuquerque,
I watched your video and I wasn't impressed by much of what was said. No real idea's, just a push for global socialism and control. No national borders and we have to pay people in Bangladesh the same as we would pay American workers to keep the world fair. He was really hung up on guaranteed minimum income for the world.
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:
My wild guess take on the Syria soap opera so far:
- Putin and Trump are playing us big time.
- The Russian warship now between the US destroyers and the Assad military base boils down to a pseudo escalation to take off some heat from the Trump Russia connection.
- The attack on the Syrian people is partially fault of the rebels and Putin that reacted to the S. Petersburg attack by bombing a rebel depot witch had gas Sarin. (No Sarin coming to Russia prompted Puttin discarding Assad)
- I don't buy it yet that Assad would commit Hara-kiri with the war already won.
Moreover who are the winners and who are the losers?
- Trump wins big time, by reganing is electorate trust back and quiete the shity Russiam conection.
- Putin with the Pseudo escalation against the US that might now play for a few weeks distance himself from Trump and gets to play big bad boy while China President is humiliated with his visit totally overshadowed by the freaking novella going on.
