Syria

my2hands said:

Drowned Out said:

my2hands said:

Drowned Out said:

my2hands said:

Do tell, what do you think my bias is? I'm intrigued

American exceptionalism, anti-Russian, by the sound of it.  You have fallen for your own R2P honey pot, judging by your world police advocacy in the other thread.  At least I own it

American exceptionalism, eh? You must not know me very well lol

That isn't world police advocacy, that's world police reality. 

You call Team America 'reality'...this is a perfect example of exceptionalism.  It's reality to you, and a minority of americans as it pertains to Syria.  Outside of the US....Team America is regarded as the greatest threat to world peace. So ya....duped.  Own it. 

Just for fun... 

What do you think would happen if Team America pulled out of NATO and and closed up shop in Europe. And cut off funding that went to military expenditures in Europe

The current geopolitical framework was setup well before you or I came along... ask an East German about Team America... I was just born here... so I dont own shit, amigo.

So in order to prove you’re not an American exceptionalist, you throw out the hypothetical ‘what would happen to Europe if we left?’
Lol, this is gold.
you go first.
I’ll start for you:

Russia...


I don’t have to ask an East German about team America.  Pew did it for me.  Highlights:

my2hands said:

America has 2,000 troops in Syria... and bombed empty facilities for about 20 minutes 

And yet they are responsible for the situation in Syria and the atrocities committed... all the shit about cracking down on opposition... mass detaining... torture... rapes... killings... civilian attacks... chemical attacks... that's all either fake or America's fault? Meanwhile, Assad and Putin are righteous peacemakers... that is literally your narrative. As well as Polaris... i mean c'mon, give me a fucking break

You're anti-US bias is being used against you and blinding you to the obvious reality of the situation

With all due respect.....can you read mang?  Can you click on any links provided to you?
I’ve stated numerous times that I don’t support Assad.  I also don’t support overthrowing him, nor dividing his country. 
I’ve provided US documents that clearly lay out motive and premeditation for the US’s role in this entire cluster fuck.  Are you seriously going to deny that the US has at the very least been supporting ‘moderate rebels’?  And that the ‘extremist rebels’ are a direct result of US actions in the region?  If so, you are being willingly dishonest with your 2000 troops and 20 minutes of bombing lies. That doesn’t scratch the surface of US involvement.

Nah, I’m light. I know my country's role in the world.  You don’t have to tell me my hands are dirty. 
Again, you are being dishonest and now coy with your narrative.  You are pretending that full scale military operations are the only way the US/NATO can strong arm a nation.  You know darn well that they can bring a country’s government to its knees virtually on a whim, and have done so dozens upon dozens of times.  But Syria is what...pure altruism?  Youre acknowledging past atrocities, but denying them in the present.  It’s a pattern that is easily recognizable from ‘up here’ (literally and figuratively )
How do we get to a point where ‘progressives’ who can acknowledge US/NATO atrocities, who hate their commander in chief, are downplaying said chief’s illegal bombing of a sovereign state?  Bizarre.  Nationalism is such a drag.

my2hands said:

Drowned Out said:

Nah, I’m light. I know my country's role in the world.  You don’t have to tell me my hands are dirty. 
Again, you are being dishonest and now coy with your narrative.  You are pretending that full scale military operations are the only way the US/NATO can strong arm a nation.  You know darn well that they can bring a country’s government to its knees virtually on a whim, and have done so dozens upon dozens of times.  But Syria is what...pure altruism?  Youre acknowledging past atrocities, but denying them in the present.  It’s a pattern that is easily recognizable from ‘up here’ (literally and figuratively )
How do we get to a point where ‘progressives’ who can acknowledge US/NATO atrocities, who hate their commander in chief, are downplaying said chief’s illegal bombing of a sovereign state?  Bizarre.  Nationalism is such a drag.

Where did I downplay or justify the bombing? The bombed an empty airfield, literally an empty airfield. Some people played it up like it was WW3... or shock & awe... I dont think anyone died in the last round? Trump announced Mission Accomplished pretty quickly... it was total wag the dog

I know there are claims of wanting regime change... those go way back to the PNAC and NEOCON heyday we all love... I dont ignore that... but to be honest, our actions the last 7 years tell me we may actually want him to remain in control... think about it, 7 years of a civil war for regime change? Only 2000 troops and 2 very limited missile strikes at empty targets? If they wanted him, and they were as all powerful as made up to be, they would have gotten him out by now. 

Obama gets a ton of criticism, by a lot of people, for ending the Iraq war and drawing down the US presence... a lot of people, very smart people that I tend to disagree with generally, think THAT is actually what lead to the rise of Islamic State and the regional destabilization... they also criticize him for the lack of military  action in the red line incident... I tend to agree with Obama on both fronts, but who knows, maybe the  other side has a point. I'm not always right, and to think you're never wrong is obviously a mistake 

Shit, maybe even Dick Cheney is right once in a while lol

You downplay the bombing in the next sentence after asking when you did lol.  
There are not 'claims' of wanting regime change - there are documented plans.  7 years of civil war for regime change - as H2M said, this is slow burn proxy war stuff.  There is zero appetite amongst the American people for war against Syria, even after all this chemical attack propaganda.  And as I've mentioned, it might not necessarily end with ousting Assad.  It may end with the country being balkanized and Assad left in power over a limited area.  I'm sure Obama blinking and giving the Russians time to move in foiled plans for all out regime change.   Even if they pull out completely now, they have still accomplished part of the stated goal of weakening or spreading thin two Iranian allies (Hezbollah being the other).   
Still, I saw a report this morning c/w satellite photos of the US expanding it's bases in Syria; building air strips etc, as they talk about pulling out.  So who knows wtf they're up to. 
Obama's 'withdrawl' did not create ISIS, nor did it destabilize the region...both were already done.  Al Qaeda in Iraq (the main foundation of ISIS) has been active since 2003.  What I presume it DID do, is allow ISIS to move into Syria more easily....in line with the plans laid out in the cables.  The influx of foreign fighters to Syria began after Libya - the same proxy fighters that shared US goals in Libya, moved to Syria, where they also shared the US's goals.  Direct ties can be made between these Libyan ISIS fighters and US policy makers - photos of their leaders with John McCain can be found online - he has snuck in and out of Syria more than once to meet with them.  

Brian - m2h and I have found common ground on not wanting to bomb Syria, and identified some misunderstandings between us.  So there's that.  We're all big boys, perfectly capable of bowing out if it gets to be too intense.

 

JC29856 said:

Max Blumenthal!
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/syria-controversy-dont-believe-the-official-narrative/
The everyday skeptics deserve our congratulations, not condescending lectures and elitist contempt.

Saw this this morning.  He's saying the same exact same things all of these indy bloggers have been saying.   I wonder if Blumenthal and/or truthdig are legitimate enough sources, or if some here will decide to discredit him, too....  
I'll say it first - Blumenthal is an anti-semite!