Post-Withdrawal Iraq

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

User avatar
$iljanus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13676
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: New England...or under your bed

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by $iljanus »

Well for the cost of martyrdom, Iran is poised to expand their influence in Iraq if this ends up passing.

From a NYT article:
Lawmakers in Iraq heeded the demands of angry citizens and voted on Sunday to expel United States troops from the country, as hundreds of thousands of mourners poured into the streets of Iran to pay their respects to the slain leader of the elite Quds Force, Maj. General Qassim Suleimani.

The vote is not final until Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi signs the draft bill. Earlier on Sunday, however, Mr. Mahdi indicated that he would do so, having urged lawmakers to oust the United States-led coalition after President Trump ordered a fatal drone strike against General Suleimani in Baghdad.
Black lives matter!

Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

Trump finally ended the war in Iraq. Right?!? He did say he did this to de-escalate a war.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Holman »

Blackhawk wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 11:11 am And numbering them based on ancient crimes. That shows strategic necessity, not egotistical revenge, right?

...right?
When an Iranian team blows up Chartres Cathedral, that's terrorism.

When we Tomahawk the Imam Reza shrine, that's payback for [checks notes]... Jerry Plotkin.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Holman wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 11:30 am
Blackhawk wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 11:11 am And numbering them based on ancient crimes. That shows strategic necessity, not egotistical revenge, right?

...right?
When an Iranian team blows up Chartres Cathedral, that's terrorism.

When we Tomahawk the Imam Reza shrine, that's payback for [checks notes]... Jerry Plotkin.
Hostages who were all released eventually. Yeah, 450 days is a long time but when we kill civilians and permenantly wipe 52 sites off the map it's disproportionate. At least we won't need a new thread.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

Hey hey don't overreact fellows - Pompeo is assuring us that these targets will be 'lawful'. Lawful like we always act nonetheless. So I am for one relieved.

User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Holman »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 11:37 am Hostages who were all released eventually.
What if we remind Republicans that Iran substantially facilitated Reagan's election?
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Kraken »

malchior wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:51 am
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:13 am
YellowKing wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2020 11:24 pm My problem is that even if Trump and his advisors were completely 100% correct in pulling this stunt, and did save countless American lives through this action, there's not a chance in hell I'd believe it. He has completely and utterly shredded any chance of me believing that anything he does is in the interest of the country and not of his bank account.
They needn't be countless. One source said that 604 American deaths over the past 2-3 decades can be pinned on Suleimani. Maybe he could have killed 600 more over the rest of his life? So, let's see how many Americans die in conflict with Iran and its proxies during the rest of Trump's reign and its aftermath. I fear that it will be more than 600.
This 600 number is all over conservative media. It is the tally of soldiers killed in Iraq by roadside bombs over a couple of year which they are now laying entirely at his feet. It is propaganda. We shouldn't buy into this bullshit. Again.
That's fine; use whatever number you're comfortable with. I only took 600 as a point of comparison between (a) additional Americans who MIGHT have died if Suli had lived, vs. (b) the number of Americans who WILL die because he was assassinated. I suspect that b > a, even if the reference number is inflated.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Smoove_B »

Kurth wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 2:43 amNone of this is to say that I’m cheerleading this attack or that I’m at all confident in the decision making process that led us here. But I stand by my earlier position that taking out a guy like Suleimani - in and of itself - doesn’t make us the bad guys.
I think on the whole I agree. What makes us bad is the post-strike justification for doing it, despite knowing full-well this wasn't the only or arguably the best option.

I'll also admit I'm not a military historian, but can you (or anyone) give me an example of the last time the United States killed an equivalent high-ranking government/public official outside of a declared armed conflict and then immediately took credit?
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Jaymann »

Smoove_B wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:18 pm
Kurth wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 2:43 amNone of this is to say that I’m cheerleading this attack or that I’m at all confident in the decision making process that led us here. But I stand by my earlier position that taking out a guy like Suleimani - in and of itself - doesn’t make us the bad guys.
I think on the whole I agree. What makes us bad is the post-strike justification for doing it, despite knowing full-well this wasn't the only or arguably the best option.

I'll also admit I'm not a military historian, but can you (or anyone) give me an example of the last time the United States killed an equivalent high-ranking government/public official outside of a declared armed conflict and then immediately took credit?
Does Bizarro World count?
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

Smoove_B wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:18 pm
Kurth wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 2:43 amNone of this is to say that I’m cheerleading this attack or that I’m at all confident in the decision making process that led us here. But I stand by my earlier position that taking out a guy like Suleimani - in and of itself - doesn’t make us the bad guys.
I think on the whole I agree. What makes us bad is the post-strike justification for doing it, despite knowing full-well this wasn't the only or arguably the best option.

I'll also admit I'm not a military historian, but can you (or anyone) give me an example of the last time the United States killed an equivalent high-ranking government/public official outside of a declared armed conflict and then immediately took credit?
Even without the narrow construction - it's never happened. The closest example is Yamamoto during WW2. We attempted 'decapitation strikes' against Saddam and co. when we went into Iraq the 2nd time but that was unsuccessful. It was also signed off by the alliance.

What the right would like you to think with repeated references to him as a terrorist is that this was like OBL. It is not - this was a state actor at play here. That is what made this unusually idiotic. Focusing on the man is a side show. The context and continuing compounding of past mistakes through lying and general malevolence is why we are the bad guys here. Our President is evil and stupid. He makes us through the abuse of his power evil. We will see over time that American empire is over as of Friday. It was dying but it is dead now.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:10 pm
malchior wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:51 am
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:13 am
YellowKing wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2020 11:24 pm My problem is that even if Trump and his advisors were completely 100% correct in pulling this stunt, and did save countless American lives through this action, there's not a chance in hell I'd believe it. He has completely and utterly shredded any chance of me believing that anything he does is in the interest of the country and not of his bank account.
They needn't be countless. One source said that 604 American deaths over the past 2-3 decades can be pinned on Suleimani. Maybe he could have killed 600 more over the rest of his life? So, let's see how many Americans die in conflict with Iran and its proxies during the rest of Trump's reign and its aftermath. I fear that it will be more than 600.
This 600 number is all over conservative media. It is the tally of soldiers killed in Iraq by roadside bombs over a couple of year which they are now laying entirely at his feet. It is propaganda. We shouldn't buy into this bullshit. Again.
That's fine; use whatever number you're comfortable with. I only took 600 as a point of comparison between (a) additional Americans who MIGHT have died if Suli had lived, vs. (b) the number of Americans who WILL die because he was assassinated. I suspect that b > a, even if the reference number is inflated.
Fair enough on point. I wasn't questioning that - more that when I see propaganda repeated it becomes truth. That number is all over the place and it comes from a classified DOD study. No one has laid eyes on it outside the military. Heck it might even be accurate but who knows. It's provinence is unknown and this administration and its flunkies don't deserve the benefit of the doubt. Like many things it exists to create the paper trail for war if it was needed.

For those reasons, I'm very peeved that the media runs with it without explaining what it means. In contrast, the op ed by Susan Rice today was much more measured and used the terms tantamount to American blood on his hands. I agree with that statement and we can extend that almost every adversary nation. Should we be taking their leadership out? Obviously not.

The number is being used for its propaganda value. Full stop. And we shouldn't buy into it. Unfortunately, it is probably too late. The mythical 600 dead laid at his feet are going to stick because the media acts as a bullhorn for this administration's lying. Another reason why we are the bad guys. Our system is built around veneration of the Presidential institution to the exclusion of reason and we are seeing that out now. We are essentially only as good as the President is as far as the world sees. The President has almost unlimited power to do good or bad as they see fit and unfortunately we have a full on neutral evil President now. Guess we'll see how this pans out.
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13681
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Max Peck »

It sounds like the Saudis may have had a hand in setting up the strike.

How was Soleimani killed?
The Iraqi prime minister revealed he had been due to meet Soleimani on Friday, the day he was killed along with six others when their vehicles were hit by missiles as they were leaving Baghdad airport.

The Iranian commander had reportedly flown in from Lebanon or Syria in the early hours of that morning.

"I was scheduled to meet martyr Soleimani at 08:30 in the morning," the prime minister said on Sunday.

"He was killed because he was set to deliver a response from Iranians to a Saudi message, which we delivered to the Iranians to reach an important breakthrough in the situation in Iraq and the region."

Also killed along with Soleimani was Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, an Iraqi who had commanded the Iranian-backed Kataib Hezbollah group.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Kraken »

malchior wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 1:18 pm
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:10 pm
malchior wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:51 am
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 12:13 am
YellowKing wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2020 11:24 pm My problem is that even if Trump and his advisors were completely 100% correct in pulling this stunt, and did save countless American lives through this action, there's not a chance in hell I'd believe it. He has completely and utterly shredded any chance of me believing that anything he does is in the interest of the country and not of his bank account.
They needn't be countless. One source said that 604 American deaths over the past 2-3 decades can be pinned on Suleimani. Maybe he could have killed 600 more over the rest of his life? So, let's see how many Americans die in conflict with Iran and its proxies during the rest of Trump's reign and its aftermath. I fear that it will be more than 600.
This 600 number is all over conservative media. It is the tally of soldiers killed in Iraq by roadside bombs over a couple of year which they are now laying entirely at his feet. It is propaganda. We shouldn't buy into this bullshit. Again.
That's fine; use whatever number you're comfortable with. I only took 600 as a point of comparison between (a) additional Americans who MIGHT have died if Suli had lived, vs. (b) the number of Americans who WILL die because he was assassinated. I suspect that b > a, even if the reference number is inflated.
Fair enough on point. I wasn't questioning that - more that when I see propaganda repeated it becomes truth. That number is all over the place and it comes from a classified DOD study. No one has laid eyes on it outside the military. Heck it might even be accurate but who knows. It's provinence is unknown and this administration and its flunkies don't deserve the benefit of the doubt. Like many things it exists to create the paper trail for war if it was needed.

For those reasons, I'm very peeved that the media runs with it without explaining what it means. In contrast, the op ed by Susan Rice today was much more measured and used the terms tantamount to American blood on his hands. I agree with that statement and we can extend that almost every adversary nation. Should we be taking their leadership out? Obviously not.

The number is being used for its propaganda value. Full stop. And we shouldn't buy into it. Unfortunately, it is probably too late. The mythical 600 dead laid at his feet are going to stick because the media acts as a bullhorn for this administration's lying. Another reason why we are the bad guys. Our system is built around veneration of the Presidential institution to the exclusion of reason and we are seeing that out now. We are essentially only as good as the President is as far as the world sees. The President has almost unlimited power to do good or bad as they see fit and unfortunately we have a full on neutral evil President now. Guess we'll see how this pans out.
Fair enough, and I won't use it again unless it comes from an independent source. Meanwhile, do you think "hundreds" is fair to say? Or "many"? I mean, depending on how one counts and whom one believes, it could be anywhere from dozens to scores to hundreds.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 2:16 pmFair enough, and I won't use it again unless it comes from an independent source. Meanwhile, do you think "hundreds" is fair to say? Or "many"? I mean, depending on how one counts and whom one believes, it could be anywhere from dozens to scores to hundreds.
I have no idea. Like I said it could even be accurate. I don't think it is a question of how bad he was. There was no scenario where taking this risk made sense. Even if it "works out" the risk taken was insane and taken for the wrong reasons.
User avatar
Daehawk
Posts: 63524
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Daehawk »

Lets link everything to 9/11, it'll look better.

Pence falsely links Iranian general to 9/11 attacks
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Holman »

I've always been grateful for the traditional firewall between the U.S. military and domestic politics, but I'm no longer so certain it would be bad for Pentagon officials to start leaking and even speaking out. Trump's abuse of foreign policy and now military force is that serious.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Kraken »

Holman wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:29 pm I've always been grateful for the traditional firewall between the U.S. military and domestic politics, but I'm no longer so certain it would be bad for Pentagon officials to start leaking and even speaking out. Trump's abuse of foreign policy and now military force is that serious.
Or maybe just don't present options that you don't want him to take. The assassination was on the menu to make less-radical actions more appealing. I imagine a lot of faces went white when he picked it.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

GungHo
Posts: 3940
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:15 am
Location: Second star to the right

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by GungHo »

malchior wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:55 pm
Yeah but we're all safer now. trump said so. That stuff is just fake news/media hysteria.

I don't know how we come back from this asshat, as a nation. Can't even have a conversation about the issues anymore; hell we can't even agree on what the issues are.
OR
cry in a corner that the world has come to a point where you have to pay for imaginary shit.

-Hiccup
GungHo
Posts: 3940
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:15 am
Location: Second star to the right

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by GungHo »

Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:52 pm
Holman wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:29 pm I've always been grateful for the traditional firewall between the U.S. military and domestic politics, but I'm no longer so certain it would be bad for Pentagon officials to start leaking and even speaking out. Trump's abuse of foreign policy and now military force is that serious.
Or maybe just don't present options that you don't want him to take. The assassination was on the menu to make less-radical actions more appealing. I imagine a lot of faces went white when he picked it.

Sorry for the double post

But....
Is he fit to be president if the military can't present every option to him, in good faith?
Also I don't really want our military deciding their own orders. Obviously with this clown anyone is a better choice but I don't like where that road goes when the military starts thinking for itself.
OR
cry in a corner that the world has come to a point where you have to pay for imaginary shit.

-Hiccup
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Holman »



What are the odds that Trump believes this tweet gives him automatic Constitutional permission to strike a foreign nation?
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Jaymann »

GungHo wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:29 pm
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:52 pm
Holman wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:29 pm I've always been grateful for the traditional firewall between the U.S. military and domestic politics, but I'm no longer so certain it would be bad for Pentagon officials to start leaking and even speaking out. Trump's abuse of foreign policy and now military force is that serious.
Or maybe just don't present options that you don't want him to take. The assassination was on the menu to make less-radical actions more appealing. I imagine a lot of faces went white when he picked it.

Sorry for the double post

But....
Is he fit to be president if the military can't present every option to him, in good faith?
Also I don't really want our military deciding their own orders. Obviously with this clown anyone is a better choice but I don't like where that road goes when the military starts thinking for itself.
Wouldn't we praise foreign military that refused to commit war crimes? I think that is where you draw the "just following orders" line.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5012
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Victoria Raverna »

Jaymann wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:52 pm
GungHo wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:29 pm
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:52 pm
Holman wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:29 pm I've always been grateful for the traditional firewall between the U.S. military and domestic politics, but I'm no longer so certain it would be bad for Pentagon officials to start leaking and even speaking out. Trump's abuse of foreign policy and now military force is that serious.
Or maybe just don't present options that you don't want him to take. The assassination was on the menu to make less-radical actions more appealing. I imagine a lot of faces went white when he picked it.

Sorry for the double post

But....
Is he fit to be president if the military can't present every option to him, in good faith?
Also I don't really want our military deciding their own orders. Obviously with this clown anyone is a better choice but I don't like where that road goes when the military starts thinking for itself.
Wouldn't we praise foreign military that refused to commit war crimes? I think that is where you draw the "just following orders" line.
Do you praise foreign military that decide they are better than the democratically elected government? Military leaders take over the government "to save the country" from the incompetent elected leaders?
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20331
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Skinypupy »

Holman wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:57 pm

What are the odds that Trump believes this tweet gives him automatic Constitutional permission to strike a foreign nation?
We’re declaring war via Twitter now.

Awesome.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Jaymann »

Victoria Raverna wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:13 pm
Jaymann wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:52 pm
GungHo wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:29 pm
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:52 pm
Holman wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:29 pm I've always been grateful for the traditional firewall between the U.S. military and domestic politics, but I'm no longer so certain it would be bad for Pentagon officials to start leaking and even speaking out. Trump's abuse of foreign policy and now military force is that serious.
Or maybe just don't present options that you don't want him to take. The assassination was on the menu to make less-radical actions more appealing. I imagine a lot of faces went white when he picked it.

Sorry for the double post

But....
Is he fit to be president if the military can't present every option to him, in good faith?
Also I don't really want our military deciding their own orders. Obviously with this clown anyone is a better choice but I don't like where that road goes when the military starts thinking for itself.
Wouldn't we praise foreign military that refused to commit war crimes? I think that is where you draw the "just following orders" line.
Do you praise foreign military that decide they are better than the democratically elected government? Military leaders take over the government "to save the country" from the incompetent elected leaders?
Are you trying to invoke Godwin's Law?
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Holman »

Pretty sure I'm going to be rereading Michael Walzer this week.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

If you haven't been keeping up.

- Trump assassinates 2nd in charge of Iran
- Iran vows revenge
- State Department tells American citizens to leave Iraq, Bahrain, and the UAE
- Trump threatens to level 52 sites for the 52 hostages including cultural sites which would be war crimes
- Iran says they will level Isreal
- Isreal says that if Hezbollah attacks then they will attack Lebanon

Trump may have started a regional conflict that could escalate into a major conflict. Besides the below he said we will not leave Iraq even if ordered to unless they pay us back. Guess that is a good guy behavior too.

User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Jaymann »

It's those darn Democrats and their uppity Geneva Convention.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Kraken »

Meanwhile, all of our real allies are like NOPE! nope nope nope.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Holman »

malchior wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:20 pm
This is entirely for the base, which means it's entirely about distracting from impeachment and trial.

Fuck this guy. He's seized the wheel and is driving the liberal-democratic era off a cliff because he thinks it will protect his personal wealth and security.

The worst Roman emperors weren't able to do this kind of damage in three years.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

Random thought - at what point does Twitter decide they don't want to be associated with the start of WW3 and shut down his account? He is literally threatening war and crimes via their platform.
Holman wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:40 pmThe worst Roman emperors weren't able to do this kind of damage in three years.
Let's be fair. We've been told over and over that the world will totally give us a mulligan and forgive us after he is gone. Let's see how that plays out before we condemn him.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

Now he is threatening to slap sanctions on Iraq. I assume he talked to the Dems about this and got their buy in, right? :lol:
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by hepcat »

malchior wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:40 pm Random thought - at what point does Twitter decide they don't want to be associated with the start of WW3 and shut down his account? He is literally threatening war and crimes via their platform.
Good luck with that. He generates revenue so they ain’t touching him.
Covfefe!
User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 17424
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by pr0ner »

Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:33 pm Meanwhile, all of our real allies are like NOPE! nope nope nope.
Regardless of the reasons for going into Iraq, the US at least formed an international coalition to do so.

The US would likely be going into this alone. MAYBE with Israel and Saudi Arabia if they get drug in via proxy.
Hodor.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70097
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by LordMortis »

malchior wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:20 pm If you haven't been keeping up.
- Trump threatens to level 52 sites for the 52 hostages including cultural sites which would be war crimes
Beyond everything else, this blows my mind. Hostages, released in 1981. 39 years before. 39 years before 1981 was 1942. Can you imagine Reagan threatening Japan over the actions of Pearl Harbor?
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

No wonder Pompeo was running around all morning defending this action - he was pushing for this action for months. Pompeo took advantage of key changes at NSC and his relationship with Esper to get from 'no' to 'yes' with Trump. He had Esper and Pence on board at least according to the article. This story rings much truer than the story that he was presented with a menu to bracket him and he chose the worst option. Instead it was a product of a coordinated campaign of manipulation.

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Kraken »

pr0ner wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 10:32 pm
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:33 pm Meanwhile, all of our real allies are like NOPE! nope nope nope.
Regardless of the reasons for going into Iraq, the US at least formed an international coalition to do so.

The US would likely be going into this alone. MAYBE with Israel and Saudi Arabia if they get drug in via proxy.
I find myself wondering how long it will take the allies to ally against the US. Not in Trump's first term, I'm sure. The not-evil world hopes that the not-evil American voters can still fire him in November. But in his second or third term, nobody will be able to pretend that we still aren't the baddies.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by malchior »

Kraken wrote: Mon Jan 06, 2020 12:15 am
pr0ner wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 10:32 pm
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:33 pm Meanwhile, all of our real allies are like NOPE! nope nope nope.
Regardless of the reasons for going into Iraq, the US at least formed an international coalition to do so.

The US would likely be going into this alone. MAYBE with Israel and Saudi Arabia if they get drug in via proxy.
I find myself wondering how long it will take the allies to ally against the US. Not in Trump's first term, I'm sure. The not-evil world hopes that the not-evil American voters can still fire him in November. But in his second or third term, nobody will be able to pretend that we still aren't the baddies.
They don't even have to ally against us. They are just going to stop cooperating on things. We see it already on Iran. Pompeo called around expecting them to be happy about it. Of course they weren't. Forget that they were not in the loop. We shit on the Iran nuclear deal from the get go , undermined all their hard work, and possibly put their people in danger. What did he expect? And that was the point of Susan Rice's oped today and several other big picture pieces about how the Trump administration broke foreign policy. They didn't model how our *allies* would react and were surprised by their reaction. That is the bare basics. Everything is by the seat of their pants. Our allies obviously see this having worked with us for decades. They know better than we do that we are complete basket cases. Even if we dump Trump, how can they trust that in 4 years hence we won't install some other evil piece of shit? They can't because we aren't reliable anymore. Our time at the top is over.
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8486
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Alefroth »

Jaymann wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:32 pm It's those darn Democrats and their uppity Geneva Convention.
Wort deal eVar!
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Post-Withdrawal Iraq

Post by Kraken »

malchior wrote: Mon Jan 06, 2020 12:23 am
Kraken wrote: Mon Jan 06, 2020 12:15 am
pr0ner wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 10:32 pm
Kraken wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:33 pm Meanwhile, all of our real allies are like NOPE! nope nope nope.
Regardless of the reasons for going into Iraq, the US at least formed an international coalition to do so.

The US would likely be going into this alone. MAYBE with Israel and Saudi Arabia if they get drug in via proxy.
I find myself wondering how long it will take the allies to ally against the US. Not in Trump's first term, I'm sure. The not-evil world hopes that the not-evil American voters can still fire him in November. But in his second or third term, nobody will be able to pretend that we still aren't the baddies.
They don't even have to ally against us. They are just going to stop cooperating on things. We see it already on Iran. Pompeo called around expecting them to be happy about it. Of course they weren't. Forget that they were not in the loop. We shit on the Iran nuclear deal from the get go , undermined all their hard work, and possibly put their people in danger. What did he expect? And that was the point of Susan Rice's oped today and several other big picture pieces about how the Trump administration broke foreign policy. They didn't model how our *allies* would react and were surprised by their reaction. That is the bare basics. Everything is by the seat of their pants. Our allies obviously see this having worked with us for decades. They know better than we do that we are complete basket cases. Even if we dump Trump, how can they trust that in 4 years hence we won't install some other evil piece of shit? They can't because we aren't reliable anymore. Our time at the top is over.
The civilized world will ally against us if we become openly dictatorial and cozier with Russia (and possibly NK, but that's a sideshow). Not-evil Americans are in the majority, but the Senate will soon give the Occupant a green light to keep rigging the next election. I'm not optimistic that we can stop this. But everything that's going wrong now has to keep going wrong for a couple more years before we get to that point, and SmooveB keeps saying that this is normal and everything will be fine. The worst case is still years away. YEARS!
Post Reply