|
Please guys, stay on topic.
This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. |
On August 30 2013 06:09 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 05:57 Plansix wrote:On August 30 2013 05:48 nunez wrote:On August 30 2013 05:12 Plansix wrote:
Mostly I am burned out on caring about the political state of countries on the other side of the world. Again, I had a brother over there for two years and it sucked the entire time. I don't really care what happens there, but I do care what happens to him. If I had my way, we would double down on electric cars and get off the need for gas ASAP, so we can stop caring about happens over there. I would add some clever quip about Norway, but I can't really be bothered to look anything up to take a dig at you for. it seems dishonest to frame the wars in question as 'caring about the political state of countries on the other side of the world' in the context of nationalistic self-pity. say that norway smells of old farts if it pleases you. i am not a nationalist. however old farts are off topic and i have probably filled up my self-righteousness quota a couple of times over already in this thread. I am just one guy, not the entire nation of the United States. After 10 years of this crap, I am tired and my family is too. Its not nationalistic self-pity, but that I am tired of having a brother and a sister in law(yes, they are both in the army together) over seas and hearing about how messed up everything is first hand. I am tried of hearing about people dying and being glad its no my brother and feeling guilt about that. I didn't vote to invade either country and never voted for anyone who did. I don't want to get involved any more or tell countries what to do. I am just tired of it all and want anyone else to fix the problems that is not the US. And I am very tried of people from other countries who never get involved with anything like this criticizing from the cheap seats. All of it get very old. What countries never get involved ? In what ? Invading Iraq ? Being cautious =/= Not getting involved.
No one should have gotten involved with Iraq, including the US. It was a pretty embarrassing war in general. Once again, I don't want to get involved with any other country's problems. But everyone is going to expect some sort of action after the UN determines that it was the regime that deployed the chemical weapons, but they will all hold off until the UK and US handle it. Maybe France might get involved, because they have more proactive lately. The rest of the UN will sit back and wait for something to do wrong.
|
On August 30 2013 06:19 Catch]22 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 05:40 Nausea wrote:
Why even bother trying to do anything over there? The same people who hates the regime and what it has done will in a day after bombings call for jihad against western forces. Let them be and they can solve their own shit. Would be good if you could actually ask the people there if they want USA to start bombing their country. Assad has done a fine job painting everyone in the resistance as a jihadist. A fine job indeed.
The instant the US becomes involved, the country will become a rallying point for jihadist. The instant the west puts any boots on the ground or tries to influence the outcome through any kind of military action, it will happen.
|
On August 30 2013 04:10 Plansix wrote:
... and all we got was hate for that too. On August 30 2013 02:48 Plansix wrote:
Mostly I expect to getting yelled at by every other country that is unwilling to get involved, but totally willing to provide criticism of those that do. On August 30 2013 05:57 Plansix wrote:
And I am very tried of people from other countries who never get involved with anything like this criticizing (who?) from the cheap seats. On August 30 2013 05:57 Plansix wrote:
I am just one guy, not the entire nation of the United States.
you seem confused
On August 30 2013 05:57 Plansix wrote:
Its not nationalistic self-pity
and well versed in doublespeak...
|
|
|
On August 30 2013 06:28 nunez wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 04:10 Plansix wrote:
... and all we got was hate for that too. Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 02:48 Plansix wrote:
Mostly I expect to getting yelled at by every other country that is unwilling to get involved, but totally willing to provide criticism of those that do. Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 05:57 Plansix wrote:
And I am very tried of people from other countries who never get involved with anything like this criticizing (who?) from the cheap seats. Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 05:57 Plansix wrote:
I am just one guy, not the entire nation of the United States. you seem confused and well versed in doublespeak...
I am pretty confused and conflicted on the topic. That is what happens when you have a family member in a war that you don't really support. On one hand you want to support your family member and its sucks to see everyone in the world criticizing them for their efforts. On the other hand, you don't support what your nation is doing and think the invasions are done for shitty reasons. It is a conflicted issue and one that I can't easily reconcile myself, since I feel my brother and his fellow troopers did the best they could. So, again, I don't really give a shit what happens in Syria. I am just tired of being criticized by people who are not directly involved and tired of being involved.
I envy your position to live in a country that does not go to war with anyone or anger the world with its actions. Its seems like a much simpler path to go down. I wish the US would stop and force other countries to invest in their military and police the nations next to them when they get into states like Syria is in. But sadly, I don't make those decision and we do get involved with issues half way around the world.
|
Also I don't get why isn't it NATO leading the charge if the charge happens.
Even if USA want to sell the idea of intervening because of use of chemical weapons, it wouldn't make sense to 'stand out' like that and lead the war. It makes perfect sense to gather the NATO heads to agree to intervene. It gets less jihad responses.
But of course if USA as a country does the intervention, then USA is the one who later uses Syria as 'an expo'. If NATO does it, then who gets the oil :p
|
Nice job Brits!
But will it stop Obama? I would sure hope so, but I don't know anymore.
|
|
|
On August 30 2013 06:43 dsousa wrote:Nice job Brits! But will it stop Obama? I would sure hope so, but I don't know anymore.
The polls in the US show people are only in support of action if there is proof. It appears the the US is not taking anything on faith, but would support a strike if chemical weapons were used.
|
LOL. They had a press release ready just in case anyone got their hopes up.
We're not eager to get involved.... so reluctant.....
|
On August 30 2013 06:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 06:09 Godwrath wrote:On August 30 2013 05:57 Plansix wrote:On August 30 2013 05:48 nunez wrote:On August 30 2013 05:12 Plansix wrote:
Mostly I am burned out on caring about the political state of countries on the other side of the world. Again, I had a brother over there for two years and it sucked the entire time. I don't really care what happens there, but I do care what happens to him. If I had my way, we would double down on electric cars and get off the need for gas ASAP, so we can stop caring about happens over there. I would add some clever quip about Norway, but I can't really be bothered to look anything up to take a dig at you for. it seems dishonest to frame the wars in question as 'caring about the political state of countries on the other side of the world' in the context of nationalistic self-pity. say that norway smells of old farts if it pleases you. i am not a nationalist. however old farts are off topic and i have probably filled up my self-righteousness quota a couple of times over already in this thread. I am just one guy, not the entire nation of the United States. After 10 years of this crap, I am tired and my family is too. Its not nationalistic self-pity, but that I am tired of having a brother and a sister in law(yes, they are both in the army together) over seas and hearing about how messed up everything is first hand. I am tried of hearing about people dying and being glad its no my brother and feeling guilt about that. I didn't vote to invade either country and never voted for anyone who did. I don't want to get involved any more or tell countries what to do. I am just tired of it all and want anyone else to fix the problems that is not the US. And I am very tried of people from other countries who never get involved with anything like this criticizing from the cheap seats. All of it get very old. What countries never get involved ? In what ? Invading Iraq ? Being cautious =/= Not getting involved. No one should have gotten involved with Iraq, including the US. It was a pretty embarrassing war in general. Once again, I don't want to get involved with any other country's problems. But everyone is going to expect some sort of action after the UN determines that it was the regime that deployed the chemical weapons, but they will all hold off until the UK and US handle it. Maybe France might get involved, because they have more proactive lately. The rest of the UN will sit back and wait for something to do wrong.
Much of the world opinion would be content with the US sticking to principles of sovereignty and acting only through means established in international law. You seem to believe people will actively change their opinion (from the "US isn't doing enough!" to the "US shouldn't be doing anything" and vice-versa) just to be able to criticize whatever the US is currently doing, but I doubt that's the case for most people. It's just paranoia, and the kind that doesn't add anything to the discussion.
|
A scenario I am concerned about should it occur:
We also vote not to intervene; something even more tragic occurs in the near future from which it can be ascertained that it was in fact Syria that was responsible all along.
People then have that feeling of "fuck we should have done something back in late August." Guilt trips all over the place which leads to my worse fear: uniform obedience to whatever our Government says without question.
|
On August 30 2013 06:57 Bayyne wrote:
A scenario I am concerned about should it occur:
We also vote not to intervene; something even more tragic occurs in the near future from which it can be ascertained that it was in fact Syria that was responsible all along.
People then have that feeling of "fuck we should have done something back in late August." Guilt trips all over the place which leads to my worse fear: uniform obedience to whatever our Government says without question.
Or better yet, learn that this war is not just FSA vs Ba'athists.
|
@plansix yes, i respect that. valid criticism is aimed in the same direction as yours, not towards you.
hooray for the house of commons.
|
|
|
Afterwards, Cameron had the idiocy to say that it is clear that Parliament does not want (military) action. The vote against was 51% with 49% for. The only thing clear is that Parliament is split on the issue with the nay-sayers having just a few more votes.
Cameron did say he would not use the Royal Prerogative to go to war before having another vote in Parliament. Cameron is such a weak PM though, probably the weakest in my lifetime. Even with the Whip he couldn't secure a majority vote such is his failure to obtain a Parliamentary majority.
It will be interesting to see what damage this failure to secure a vote will do to Cameron's career as PM.
|
Peace in our time, amirite?
+ Show Spoiler +jk, holding off on military engagement is probably the best course.
|
|
|
Wow 285 to 272. That's way more split down the middle than I thought it would be either way.
|
Pretty damaging and especially disgusting with Ed Miliband saying he gave support to Cameron then withdrawing it at the last second on a matter as serious as this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
