snafu Posted April 3, 2018 Share Posted April 3, 2018 On 3/30/2018 at 1:35 PM, DC Tom said: He's completing the hand-over of our Middle East influence to Putin that Obama started. Yep. Once the Russians stepped into the vacuum and helped Assad win, I'm sure the U.S. is persona non grata. Don't have much of a choice in getting out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 3, 2018 Share Posted April 3, 2018 try not to blame yourself when insane people hate you for no good reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted April 3, 2018 Share Posted April 3, 2018 6 hours ago, ALF said: Saudi Arabia's crown prince slams Obama's Iran nuclear deal, backs Israel's right to exist "He is the Hitler of the Middle East." - Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, on Iran's Supreme Leader http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/04/03/saudi-arabias-crown-prince-slams-obamas-iran-nuclear-deal-backs-israels-right-to-exist.html Not sure where this will lead With Tillerson and McMaster gone now with Bolton in Trump's ear , we will see I think that's the exact language Netanyahu used when he was on Levin's show a couple weeks ago. Maybe both were reading from the same Sinclair Media Empire script? Or, they see things the same way and enemies make strange bedfellows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 3, 2018 Share Posted April 3, 2018 34 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I've been laying out since November where this is going. The GCC has defeated Hezbollah in multiple countries, the funding for Shia and Sunni terror groups originating out of the KSA (and backed by CIA elements) has been cut off and seized. The ME is going to fix itself by ousting the Mullahs by November while we keep Putin and China from interfering. By the end of this year we are going to have a denuclearized DPRK, a mullah-less Iran, and the ground paved for real peace talks between Israel and Palestine. The annual ROK-US exercises are going on this week. Most people aren't aware, because the DPRK has kept quiet about it, and not performed their usual "This is an act of war, and we're going to kill all you Americans!" song and dance. That accomplishment alone - getting the DPRK to shut the hell up during ROK-US exercises - is more worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize than anything Obama did to be awarded his. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 3, 2018 Share Posted April 3, 2018 38 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I've been laying out since November where this is going. The GCC has defeated Hezbollah in multiple countries, the funding for Shia and Sunni terror groups originating out of the KSA (and backed by CIA elements) has been cut off and seized. The ME is going to fix itself by ousting the Mullahs by November while we keep Putin and China from interfering. By the end of this year we are going to have a denuclearized DPRK, a mullah-less Iran, and the ground paved for real peace talks between Israel and Palestine. ... And Obama will get credit. Absolutely. Amd what's happened to make them feel so enabled? Everything listed above plus the GCC has been quietly kicking ass with commando infiltration teams supported by us and other western allies. Don't be so hasty. Gator, after his nap, has plenty of time to outdo himself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 Dozens reported killed in suspected Syria gas attack; Damascus denies https://www.cnbc.com/.../dozens-reported-killed-in-suspected-syria-gas-attack-damasc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 1 hour ago, B-Man said: Dozens reported killed in suspected Syria gas attack; Damascus denies https://www.cnbc.com/.../dozens-reported-killed-in-suspected-syria-gas-attack-damasc.. Track the sequence of events and REALLY think about the logic of attacking now: First: Trump announces the US is going to pull out of Syria last week, Result: The media spins it as helping Putin and Assad as well as ISIS and Hezbollah (both of whom are no longer in Syria in a serious way btw)... crying out for more perma-war (that benefits whom exactly? Not Russia, not Assad, not Iran... but whom?). Now: Less than a week later - there's a chemical attack "by Assad" (or Putin depending on your news source) which will accomplish nothing more than public outcry for the US to stay in Syria by both sides of the political aisle. Result: The same media is using this as cause to stay in Syria and escalate the conflict. HMMM... Put yourself in Putin or Assad's shoes. What sense does launching a chemical attack NOW make? It doesn't gain territory, all it does is give the US an excuse to stay in the region. The media made it clear for a week how pulling out benefits Putin and Assad and the Mullahs... so why would any of those elements risk forcing the US to course correct? Especially after Trump already responded with Tomahawks to the last chemical attack? IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE - not because the enemy is stupid or impatient. They're neither. It doesn't make sense because the origin of the chemical attack comes from those who wish us to STAY in Syria. Those who wish us to stay long enough to START AN ACTUAL SHOOTING WAR WITH RUSSIA, IRAN, AND ASSAD. Who are the forces with that goal? It's not a nation state in the traditional sense. It's the elements within the IC (CIA) who have been pushing that agenda since 2014. The ones who backed the other candidate. The ones who have spent the past 12+ months being flushed from State and Langley. The ones who backed bin Talal. The ones who are LOSING. Think this through without partisanship. Do your own math and I guarantee you'll come to the same answer. This is a move devoid of logic unless the logic the media is trying to give is a lie.The strategy the MSM is pushing makes zero sense from Putin's, Assad's, or the Mullah's perspective. It makes no sense from ISIS or Hezbollah's perspective either. The only people who benefit from a chemical attack now are the ones who wish the US to stay in the region. Those enemies are DOMESTIC, folks. Don't be fooled again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 No ****? https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/08/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-attack-ghouta.html … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 Echoing Greg, I emplor you to consider the notion that Assad, corrupt as he may be is a rational actor towards his ends. It it does not serve any discernible interest of Assad, or Russia, for Assad to have done this. This attack runs counter to their interests. Do not urge a rush to war. Do not send young Americans to kill and be killed by young Syrians over a lie. Hold the people who continue to manipulate you with the deaths of others accountable. Live free. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 It was not wise for Obama to declare the red line, I had zero hope that he would have backed it up with war his attempts to downplay what it clearly was was beneath him.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) The usual suspects. This is an Obama hating board, but thank god this guy didn't become president. Lindsay Graham https://nypost.com/2018/04/08/trumps-response-to-syria-attack-is-defining-moment-is-his-presidency-graham/ “If it becomes a tweet without meaning, then he’s hurt himself with North Korea, and if he doesn’t follow through he’s going to look weak in the eyes of Russia and Iran,”Graham said. “You need to follow through with that tweet. Show a resolve that Obama never did to get this right.” “They see our determination to stay in Syria waning,” Graham said. “And it’s no accident they used chemical weapons.” Edited April 8, 2018 by Doc Brown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Those who wish us to stay long enough to START AN ACTUAL SHOOTING WAR WITH RUSSIA, IRAN, AND ASSAD. Who are the forces with that goal? My best guess would be Saudi Arabia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 McCain always had a hairtrigger creepy angry and pissy angle to him, regilarly noted by conservatives the last 30 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Echoing Greg, I emplor you to consider the notion that Assad, corrupt as he may be is a rational actor towards his ends. It it does not serve any discernible interest of Assad, or Russia, for Assad to have done this. This attack runs counter to their interests. Do not urge a rush to war. Do not send young Americans to kill and be killed by young Syrians over a lie. Hold the people who continue to manipulate you with the deaths of others accountable. Live free. Or, maybe the Syrians saw us getting out soon and figured we aren't going to pull a 180 and jump back in. It could be that this is an emboldened Assad punishing what's left of what he considers to be rebels who tried and failed. He's used chemical weapons before, and this explanation could also (for Assad) be viewed as acting rationally toward his ends. That's also a notion to be considered. I'm not discounting one or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 54 minutes ago, snafu said: Or, maybe the Syrians saw us getting out soon and figured we aren't going to pull a 180 and jump back in. It could be that this is an emboldened Assad punishing what's left of what he considers to be rebels who tried and failed. He's used chemical weapons before, and this explanation could also (for Assad) be viewed as acting rationally toward his ends. That's also a notion to be considered. I'm not discounting one or the other. But wouldn't waiting until US troops are actually gone be a BETTER hedge against the US reversing policy & provide a better opportunity to kill a few dozen enemies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 11 minutes ago, snafu said: Or, maybe the Syrians saw us getting out soon and figured we aren't going to pull a 180 and jump back in. It could be that this is an emboldened Assad punishing what's left of what he considers to be rebels who tried and failed. He's used chemical weapons before, and this explanation could also (for Assad) be viewed as acting rationally toward his ends. That's also a notion to be considered. I'm not discounting one or the other. Or...the report's inaccurate. I've heard it reported as a "Sarin gas attack," where "dozens of people choked to death." That's not how Sarin works... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, GG said: My best guess would be Saudi Arabia I understand in part how you could make that case - and by all means lay it out if you wish - but they're in Syria (and winning) with or without us. The way we have been supporting them won't change if we "pulled out" (however you want to define that). By that I mean the GCC (from my understanding) has been waging a very successful campaign using dozens of small fire teams of 12-20 commandos (attached to local forces) who are backed (literally) by their own air/sea/artillery forces. Our assistance is in logistics/intelligence/satellite areas (and to deter Russia/China from taking a more proactive role) which aren't among the groups who would be "pulled out". Everything I've read or been shown leads me to believe our goal is to let the GCC win it for themselves with as little visible help from us as possible. In part that's to help cement the new/future king's authority/legacy as he wages a battle to reform/modernize at home, but also because the geopolitical strategy at work understands that this is the faster way to achieve stability and peace. While I fully admit this is speculation at this point, I think the Saudis realize that we are looking at the possibility of a Mulla-less Iran in less than year. They know, better than us, how badly Hezbollah's been hit and how much of ISIS actually remains (not much). A false flag type chemical attack now would bring instability precisely when they're on the verge of bringing stability themselves after several years' effort. But that's just MO of course. 50 minutes ago, snafu said: Or, maybe the Syrians saw us getting out soon and figured we aren't going to pull a 180 and jump back in. It could be that this is an emboldened Assad punishing what's left of what he considers to be rebels who tried and failed. He's used chemical weapons before, and this explanation could also (for Assad) be viewed as acting rationally toward his ends. That's also a notion to be considered. I'm not discounting one or the other. I hear you on not discounting. You could be right - but if that's the case, why not wait until we're gone. Why risk it? The order hadn't been given (it was Trump speculating... or baiting the trap depending on how you want to spin it) - doing it now is dangerous. Sure, Assad could have gone nutty (or one of his generals broke ranks) - can't discount it entirely. But it would still be a strategic mistake of serious consequence. They happen. Edited April 9, 2018 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 46 minutes ago, Taro T said: But wouldn't waiting until US troops are actually gone be a BETTER hedge against the US reversing policy & provide a better opportunity to kill a few dozen enemies? 5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I hear you on not discounting. You could be right - but if that's the case, why not wait until we're gone. Why risk it? The order hadn't been given (it was Trump speculating... or baiting the trap depending on how you want to spin it) - doing it now is dangerous. Sure, Assad could have gone nutty (or one of his generals broke ranks) - can't discount it entirely. But it would still be a strategic mistake of serious consequence. They happen. Yes, it would be a big risk (if there was an attack perpetrated by Assad or his proxies). But now that it looks like there's no more serious threat of rebel activity and Assad is solidifying his resurgence with Russia's support, I wouldn't put it past Assad to discount the resolve of the US repeating a response. And, honestly, the last US response was to fire a few missiles at an airfield. Then again, reading the article, if it wasn't Assad, then maybe his claim that these attacks are "staged" is a last-ditch effort for the rebels to get the US to re-engage. So there's another possible explanation (the unlikely event that Assad's story is true). I honestly have no idea. Just trying to figure out explanations that might be possible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Quote Idrees Ahmad ✔@im_PULSE Regime sources are reporting that Assad's T4 Airbase in Homs is under attack. Earlier @Joyce_Karam reported jets flying east from the Mediterranean across Jounieh, Lebanon. Identity of the attackers not yet known. #Syria 9:10 PM - Apr 8, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 11 minutes ago, B-Man said: Could be the French? https://www.rt.com/news/418707-macron-syria-chemical-strike/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts