Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

  On 1/20/2018 at 7:32 PM, Squee said:

sure but remember nothing means anything

Let's hope this shutdown means a few days off killing little innocent brown children in the middle east

I'm pretty sure federal bureaucrats aren't directly involved in killing anyone, so no. Also, most of those brown children are being killed by brown adults, the amount of kids being killed by the US military is pretty small really.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/trump-killed-more-civilians-obama/

Doesn't really contradict what I just said, even if the numbers have increased under Trump, they're still a small minority of the overall civilian casualties, and the military aren't affected by the shutdown.

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:32 PM, caze said:

Doesn't really contradict what I just said, even if the numbers have increased under Trump, they're still a small minority of the overall civilian casualties, and the military aren't affected by the shutdown.

That wasn't my point, I wasn't talking about the military itself; more so the executive branch. I'm not denying that we aren't the main perpetrator of collateral, but the west is the root cause of the instability in the region. We need to leave, and if something worse comes out of us leaving we can only blame ourselves.

no, the west is not the root cause of anything in the region

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:38 PM, caze said:

no, the west is not the root cause of anything in the region

What? Assassination and imprisonment of secular leaders? The war on terror? Maybe the region wouldn't be so radical if we didn't play the part of policeman of the world.

To be honest, it was still pretty fucked before the US started playing world police.

Or maybe it would be worse? Sectarian and tribal conflict, genocide, Islamist theocracy, and ethnic fascism all precede the west's involvement in the middle east. That's not to say there haven't been lots of cack-handed interventions, all I was saying it wasn't the root cause, which it wasn't.

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:50 PM, Squee said:

To be honest, it was still pretty fucked before the US started playing world police.

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:55 PM, caze said:

Or maybe it would be worse? Sectarian and tribal conflict, genocide, Islamist theocracy, and ethnic fascism all precede the west's involvement in the middle east. That's not to say there haven't been lots of cack-handed interventions, all I was saying it wasn't the root cause, which it wasn't.

You guys are exactly right - for thousands of years the region has been unstable. When referring to "root conflict" I was talking about the intensity post 2003. But what remains the same is that this is their conflict. Not ours. We don't have and never have had any reason to be there in the first place.

  On 1/20/2018 at 10:16 PM, clarktrent said:

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:50 PM, Squee said:

To be honest, it was still pretty fucked before the US started playing world police.

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:55 PM, caze said:

Or maybe it would be worse? Sectarian and tribal conflict, genocide, Islamist theocracy, and ethnic fascism all precede the west's involvement in the middle east. That's not to say there haven't been lots of cack-handed interventions, all I was saying it wasn't the root cause, which it wasn't.

You guys are exactly right - for thousands of years the region has been unstable. When referring to "root conflict" I was talking about the intensity post 2003. But what remains the same is that this is their conflict. Not ours. We don't have and never have had any reason to be there in the first place.

 

Oh, I don't disagree with that.

  On 1/20/2018 at 10:27 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 10:16 PM, clarktrent said:

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:50 PM, Squee said:

To be honest, it was still pretty fucked before the US started playing world police.

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:55 PM, caze said:

Or maybe it would be worse? Sectarian and tribal conflict, genocide, Islamist theocracy, and ethnic fascism all precede the west's involvement in the middle east. That's not to say there haven't been lots of cack-handed interventions, all I was saying it wasn't the root cause, which it wasn't.

You guys are exactly right - for thousands of years the region has been unstable. When referring to "root conflict" I was talking about the intensity post 2003. But what remains the same is that this is their conflict. Not ours. We don't have and never have had any reason to be there in the first place.

 

 

Oh, I don't disagree with that.

 

didn't they arbitrarily draw up borders after WWII? or before that? i can't recall.. and by "they" i mean the UK and some other nations.. 

then the US and the brits sank iran's democratically elected president mossedegh to protect british petroleum because mossedegh had nationalized the oil industry  which the brits had controlled for a long time. 

there's a great book about it called "All the Shah's Men" and a longer title to it about the CIA etc etc.. it's a fascinating read. basically spells out how we set the stage for a religious revolt to oust the shah.. ya know.. one of those unintended consequences things.. like iraq and the islamic state.. ISIS or whatever ya wanna call it.. 

it's always been known that isis was the new name for al qaeda in iraq, which came into existence and rose to power in the wake of the 03 liberation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq

  On 1/20/2018 at 11:41 PM, ignatius said:

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 10:27 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 10:16 PM, clarktrent said:

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:50 PM, Squee said:

To be honest, it was still pretty fucked before the US started playing world police.

 

  On 1/20/2018 at 9:55 PM, caze said:

Or maybe it would be worse? Sectarian and tribal conflict, genocide, Islamist theocracy, and ethnic fascism all precede the west's involvement in the middle east. That's not to say there haven't been lots of cack-handed interventions, all I was saying it wasn't the root cause, which it wasn't.

You guys are exactly right - for thousands of years the region has been unstable. When referring to "root conflict" I was talking about the intensity post 2003. But what remains the same is that this is their conflict. Not ours. We don't have and never have had any reason to be there in the first place.

 

 

Oh, I don't disagree with that.

 

 

 

didn't they arbitrarily draw up borders after WWII? or before that? i can't recall.. and by "they" i mean the UK and some other nations.. 

 

then the US and the brits sank iran's democratically elected president mossedegh to protect british petroleum because mossedegh had nationalized the oil industry  which the brits had controlled for a long time. 

 

there's a great book about it called "All the Shah's Men" and a longer title to it about the CIA etc etc.. it's a fascinating read. basically spells out how we set the stage for a religious revolt to oust the shah.. ya know.. one of those unintended consequences things.. like iraq and the islamic state.. ISIS or whatever ya wanna call it.. 

 

I think it was in 1953 the CIA got involved in that overthrow in Iran. There was an official name for the incident too, I think. And of course the signs of blowback have been evident since 1979.

Anyway, in relation to the thread, it's funny how Trumpsters have this xenophobic/isolationist idea about America shutting itself off from immigrants and so-called globalists...yet any notion of the long-standing overseas military intervention (i.e. bombing civilians) that's long underscored US foreign policy is somehow all Obama's doing. Yes, this has been going on throughout the last decade, but it's never stopped since Trump took power a year ago. If anything the stats have become more obscured. In other words, the Pentagon has become even less transparent since then. At least based on all the info I've been following throughout last year.

'Defense'.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-defense-congress/senate-sends-700-billion-defense-bill-to-trump-funding-uncertain-idUSKBN1DG2ZA

Nobody ever has a problem with military spending.

The west has been fing shit up for ages...we all know that...'intervention'? invasion, manipulation of elections and economies, supporting insurgencies, destabilisation by any means etc Equivocation about how 'they' f their own shit up anyways is completely beside the point. We've been in the thick of it undoubtedly and have played a significant role in the roots.

Savage granny, from the 1st Anniversary Women's March yesterday (NSFW language)

Right on.

that'll show him

she's too old to matter to him. 

  On 1/21/2018 at 11:27 PM, ignatius said:

she's too old to matter to him. 

Fair point. Not blonde enough either for that matter.

  On 1/22/2018 at 10:39 AM, very honest said:

Is he the only normal person in US politics?