General / Off-Topic Is man made climate change real or not? Prove your belief here.

[Ian Skippy]

But no country other than Russia would have a vital interest to support the current potus (ok, except the Brits perhaps... )

Not true at all. For example, you can bet your rear that Erdogan is counting his blessings. Without Trump there would have been zero chance of the US bombing its own bases in order to betray their own allies faster, for example. Its bizarre to see just how much power and control the US has ceded on the international stage.

 

[jasonbarron]

Is that according to wickipedia again?

 

[Ian Skippy]

Claims ultimate authority on a murky, poorly understood subject, sites wickipedia as ultimate evidence. Thanks for my first good laugh of the morning, Ian

It is up to you whether you want to read and consider something, or whether you want to defend your little hill to the end. You can read-up on that topic, either via the references or your own research, if you want to know more. But something tells me your 'independent thinking' will result in the instant dismissal of anything not fitting your world view, and the usual prefab talking points.

Btw, Russia's influence on the US election is not a 'murky, poorly understood' subject, and I didnt claim ultimate authority.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Is that according to wickipedia again?

Do you think it was a good thing for the US to bomb its own bases in order to betray their own allies?

 

[jasonbarron]

It is up to you whether you want to read and consider something, or whether you want to defend your little hill to the end. You can read-up on that topic, either via the references or your own research, if you want to know more. But something tells me your 'independent thinking' will result in the instant dismissal of anything not fitting your world view, and the usual prefab talking points.

Nah man, I agree that Russia and the Ukraine meddled and will continue to do so. The last three years of upheavals in the media "over collusion/obstruction/quidpro quo with Ukraine" is all about those in America who are down with it desperately covering their backsides. It's just you citing "wickipedia" that gave me a chuckle.

Edit: the problem with your question about base bombing is that really will get us (probably me mostly, because I'm not woke enough) in trouble for discussing politics. Short answer...abandoning our allies is a tragedy, on the other hand we've been at war for nearly 20 years and there's never going to be a good time to pull out. If the prior admin had done it you Europeans would be silent and the US media would be feting the President, but as it is we get a President now who actually does try to withdraw from war and you lot and our press gleefully call him coward. Trying to play the public opinion game is not going to ever be a winning strategy when your side of the global calculation only wants to see this administration burn, no matter the cost.

This is one of the reasons I predict a big win in 2020: people like me who didn't vote for him in 2016 are finally fed up with the lying narrative and I can guarantee you that there will be a ground swell of Independents who throw their support behind him.

 

[Patrick_68000]

Wait, isn't the UN not already declared as part of the axis of evil?

By some morons, certainly.

 

[Bloodsign]

Not true at all. For example, you can bet your rear that Erdogan is counting his blessings. Without Trump there would have been zero chance of the US bombing its own bases in order to betray their own allies faster, for example. Its bizarre to see just how much power and control the US has ceded on the international stage.

This is a bit ingenuously worded. I should point out that the US is very contradictory in choosing/supporting allies. For example, we've trained and armed the Lebanese Army for awhile, which basically supports Hezbollah, an affirmed enemy if our "most important ally" in the MidEast, Israel.

There's no one at the helm of the American ship, no cohesive vision for the future. At some point, we will be forced to choose between our allies and take sides. "Betrayal"? Yeah, I guess it is, but we were dumb enough to get entangled in the first place. We often "ally" ourselves with those who were never our friends to begin with.

Go read about how the CIA created Al Quaida.

 

[Ian Skippy]

We often "ally" ourselves with those who were never our friends to begin with.

Comparing the Kurds with Al Qaeda or Hezbollah is absurd. For once you guys actually did manage to have loyal allies in the region, and you threw it away for absolutely zero strategic or tactical purpose. This wasn't the usual 'give piles of weapons to the enemy of your enemy and see what happens' deal.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...urds-blast-trumps-syria-retreat-idUSKBN1X00ZO

My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.

Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position.

It is painful to read, really.

 

[jasonbarron]

By some morons, certainly.

 

[jasonbarron]

This is a bit ingenuously worded. I should point out that the US is very contradictory in choosing/supporting allies. For example, we've trained and armed the Lebanese Army for awhile, which basically supports Hezbollah, an affirmed enemy if our "most important ally" in the MidEast, Israel.

There's no one at the helm of the American ship, no cohesive vision for the future. At some point, we will be forced to choose between our allies and take sides. "Betrayal"? Yeah, I guess it is, but we were dumb enough to get entangled in the first place. We often "ally" ourselves with those who were never our friends to begin with.

Go read about how the CIA created Al Quaida.

Unlike Ian's position which is simply scoring points on the Internet, this view actually has some meat on it's bones.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Short answer...abandoning our allies is a tragedy, on the other hand we've been at war for nearly 20 years and there's never going to be a good time to pull out. If the prior admin had done it you Europeans would be silent and the US media would be feting the President, but as it is we get a President now who actually does try to withdraw from war and you lot and our press gleefully call him coward.

Lol, we're really down to "I bet if Obama did it you would be cool with it!"? The thing is that the previous administration had a tendency to inform its allies, whereas the current one failed to even inform its own military in advance. It was an atrocious decision performed hopelessly poorly.

Oh, the troops were moved to Iraq, btw, instead of withdrawn. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50117765 Same number of US troops in the area, just one ally less and a resurgence of IS.

 

[Bloodsign]

Comparing the Kurds with Al Qaeda or Hezbollah is absurd. For once you guys actually did manage to have loyal allies in the region, and you threw it away for absolutely zero strategic or tactical purpose. This wasn't the usual 'give piles of weapons to the enemy of your enemy and see what happens' deal.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...urds-blast-trumps-syria-retreat-idUSKBN1X00ZO

Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with you, just clarifying. Everyone is acting like this "betrayal" is surprising and uncharacteristic. In actuality it's a result of America trying to be the policeman of the world, and it will happen again. Actually, I think it's likely that we will betray Israel in the upcoming decades too.

Much of what America does is unjustifiable, inconsistent, and morally ambiguous.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Everyone is acting like this "betrayal" is surprising and uncharacteristic.

If the last 18 months would have been 'business as usual' you'd still have Mattis as Defence Secretary. Yes, the US has a rather shady history when it comes to such topics, but what is happening now is quite different even from that.

 

[jasonbarron]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with you, just clarifying. Everyone is acting like this "betrayal" is surprising and uncharacteristic. In actuality it's a result of America trying to be the policeman of the world, and it will happen again. Actually, I think it's likely that we will betray Israel in the upcoming decades too.

Much of what America does is unjustifiable, inconsistent, and morally ambiguous.

We will definitely betray the Israelis once the Democratic party takes over again.

 

[Morbad]

Do you think it was a good thing for the US to bomb its own bases in order to betray their own allies?

This statement is a mix up of cause and effect.

The US decided to withdraw and destroyed left over assets that could not be evacuated on such short notice. They didn't destroy those bases to facilitate betrayal or withdrawl, but as a consequence of it.

 

[Ian Skippy]

We will definitely betray the Israelis once the Democratic party takes over again.

After they take your guns and destroy Christmas, of course. I too like to resort to fear mongering based on hypothetical and unfounded future events when the present-day realities don't fit my world view. The GOP clearly does something bad now? Just make up something the democratic party will do in the future!

 

[Ian Skippy]

This statement is a mix up of cause and effect.

The US decided to withdraw and destroyed left over assets that could not be evacuated on such short notice. They didn't destroy those bases to facilitate betrayal or withdrawl, but as a consequence of it.

They could have simply evacuated on a normal schedule, based on some kind of strategic vision. The reason they destroyed their bases was because the administration insisted on stabbing their allies in the back ASAP, regardless of consequences.

 

[Robin of Spiritwood]

This is a bit ingenuously worded. I should point out that the US is very contradictory in choosing/supporting allies. For example, we've trained and armed the Lebanese Army for awhile, which basically supports Hezbollah, an affirmed enemy if our "most important ally" in the MidEast, Israel.

There's no one at the helm of the American ship, no cohesive vision for the future. At some point, we will be forced to choose between our allies and take sides. "Betrayal"? Yeah, I guess it is, but we were dumb enough to get entangled in the first place. We often "ally" ourselves with those who were never our friends to begin with.

Go read about how the CIA created Al Quaida.

That was the whole point of installing their unstable corrupt puppet, and subverting a (formerly) major party. The damage to US institutions cannot be easily repaired, because the New Monarchists will merely oppose anything rational. The overt pro Russian support is quite entrenched in RW media now, senators are parotting Fox copies of disinformation straight from Russian intel sources, to defend the indefensible puppet.

Which "allies" are even left?
After the Kurd debacle, it's every man for himself. The US is even actively firing its own military officers now, after bombing its own bases.

There are few feet left to saw off. Despite the dementia and general incompetence, Trump has been a very effective anti-American tool, just wait till the next economic collapse goes thundering through and you'll see the full extent of the damage.

If the last 18 months would have been 'business as usual' you'd still have Mattis as Defence Secretary. Yes, the US has a rather shady history when it comes to such topics, but what is happening now is quite different even from that.

Precisely so. This situation is the result of an information attack on a vulnerable subset of the electorate.

 

[Ozric]

This is not about politics, wars, terrorist organisations. Please stop discussing that kind of stuff here!

 

[Morbad]

They could have simply evacuated on a normal schedule. The reason they destroyed their bases was because the administration insisted on stabbing their allies in the back ASAP.

Your statement still makes it sound like attacking the bases was the betrayal or something that facilitated it. The betrayal was the abandonment of allies. Destruction of those bases was simply a procedural inevitability (and good practice) once the decision to leave unscheduled had been made. To do anything else would have been a greater betrayal, because that materiel would almost certainly have wound up in Turkish hands.