Rand Paul: We Should Leave Assad Alone Because He’s Only Killing Muslims

The libertarian loon contingent weighs in
Wingnuts • Views: 32,362

Today’s totally cock-eyed opinions on Syria come from one of the true Republican weirdos in the Senate: Rand Paul: No American Interests in Syria.

According to Aqua Buddha, America has no interests in Syria and we should leave them alone. And besides, Bashar al-Assad is only killing Muslims, so who cares?

I wish I was just exaggerating, but that’s really his “point,” if you can call it that.

“I don’t see American interests involved on either side of this Syrian war. I see [Bashar] Assad, who has protected Christians for a number of decades, and Islamic rebels on the other side who have been attacking Christians,” Paul said.

And by the way, even though America has no reason to care at all about thousands of people killed by sarin gas, because Muslims, Rand Paul still thinks Obama has failed. Because he should have been talking with Russia and China, and then Assad would have been gone already.

Unfortunately, when Sen. Paul expressed this bizarre opinion on Meet the Press, nobody laughed out loud.

“I think the failure of the Obama administration has been we haven’t engaged the Russians enough or the Chinese enough on this,” the Kentucky Republican said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“The Russians have every reason to want to keep their influence in Syria, and I think the only way they do is if there’s a change in government where Assad is gone” but other current members remain, Paul said. “That would also be good for the Christians.” He noted earlier that Assad has protected Christians “for decades.”

The senator went on to say that a failure to do so could result in an Islamic state that could persecute Christians in the country. And Russia, he said, could have an influence on the country if they told the government “no more weapons.”

What the hell is this man talking about? I just can’t even.

Jump to bottom

214 comments
1 thedopefishlives  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:46:11pm

Hey douchewad, news flash: Muslims are people too. Despite you and yours’ transparent attempt to dehumanize them.

2 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:46:17pm

Fuck it all man if this guy gets nominated or God forbid elected president. Assad is a monster, Rand, but you and your father who have never met a tyrant you haven’t liked don’t care.

3 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:46:51pm

re: #1 thedopefishlives

Hey douchewad, news flash: Muslims are people too. Despite you and yours’ transparent attempt to dehumanize them.

No shit. Still like him, lefty puritans? He’s a theocratic fuck who only thinks the lives of Christians should be valued.

4 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:47:34pm

Rand Paul also doesn’t see any American Interests in the Civil Rights Act, so I’ll take his vision of what does and does not constitute American Interest with a rather substantial grain of salt.

5 Bulworth  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:47:35pm

Assad’s now a role model for the derp circle. Never saw this coming.

6 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:48:25pm

re: #4 erik_t

Rand Paul also doesn’t see any American Interests in the Civil Rights Act, so I’ll take his vision of what does and does not constitute American Interest with a rather substantial grain of salt.

I’ll say it here. Rand Paul and his father are reactionaries who would be okay if slavery was still around in the United States.

7 Political Atheist  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:48:46pm

Hater. *spit*. Those are people with twice the humanity you display you cretin.

8 Bulworth  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:48:54pm

Assad: Protector of Christians. This is just fascinating. The wingnut factory must be working over time to come up with stuff like this./

9 Tigger2  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:49:07pm

And some people don’t think he is as damn crazy as his dad, Just change the first name and he is his dad just a little younger.

10 jaunte  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:49:24pm

re: #6 HappyWarrior

“Whatever the individual states decide to do.”

11 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:50:42pm

I don’t even know if I want us to militarily intervene in Syria especially with boots on the ground but damn it. I’m sick of people like Paul who think only Christians should have human rights. If Assad was targeting Christians, people like Rand Paul, Sarah Palin, Bryan Fischer, etc would be the first ones calling for a military intervention and calling any slow movement proof that Obama’s anti-Christian but because Bashar Al-Assad primarily targets fellow Muslims, democide is okay. Fuck you. I’m ashamed that you’re my fellow Americans. You people make George W. Bush look like a proud progressive.

12 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:51:17pm

re: #8 Bulworth

Assad: Protector of Christians. This is just fascinating. The wingnut factory must be working over time to come up with stuff like this./

I guess I shouldn’t be too shocked. Remember when Michelle Bachmann discovered her new friend, Qaddafi.

13 Bulworth  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:51:23pm

Also, too: “We should be talking to Russia/China.” I coulda swore that not very long ago (We Are All Chechnyans, We Are All Georgians) the Obummer was being too weak in dealing with our great enemy Russia. //

14 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:52:09pm

He makes it sound like Assad has been exerting some massive will to protect Christians. Christians have been very well-integrated into Syria. I’m sure a lot of the Islamists don’t like that and really do want to persecute them and that’s part of the sectarian tensions. Christians really might suffer in the aftermath of Assad’s downfall, it’s totally believable.

What I don’t get is how this connects to his use of chemical weapons.

15 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:52:10pm

re: #8 Bulworth

Assad: Protector of Christians. This is just fascinating. The wingnut factory must be working over time to come up with stuff like this./

It will be very interesting to see if this “Assad, defender of the Christian faith” nonsense crystallizes as the RW talking point here.

From within the wingnut circle jerk, this may seem plausible, but it is bizarre and repellent to those who still deal with reality.

16 thedopefishlives  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:52:12pm

re: #13 Bulworth

Also, too: “We should be talking to Russia/China.” I coulda swore that not very long ago (We Are All Chechnyans, We Are All Georgians) the Obummer was being too weak in dealing with our great enemy Russia. //

We need to steal back that Super Bowl ring!

17 thedopefishlives  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:52:48pm

re: #14 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

He makes it sound like Assad has been exerting some massive will to protect Christians. Christians have been very well-integrated into Syria. I’m sure a lot of the Islamists don’t like that and really do want to persecute them and that’s part of the sectarian tensions. Christians really might suffer in the aftermath of Assad’s downfall, it’s totally believable.

What I don’t get is how this connects to his use of chemical weapons.

It doesn’t matter. Because Jesus.

18 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:53:26pm

re: #14 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

He makes it sound like Assad has been exerting some massive will to protect Christians. Christians have been very well-integrated into Syria. I’m sure a lot of the Islamists don’t like that and really do want to persecute them and that’s part of the sectarian tensions. Christians really might suffer in the aftermath of Assad’s downfall, it’s totally believable.

What I don’t get is how this connects to his use of chemical weapons.

From the RW nutjob point of view, use of weapons of mass destruction against non-Christians is a non-issue.

19 Bulworth  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:54:02pm

Next: Assad is a Christian and Syria a Christian country. Impeach Oboma if he attacks a Christian country. //

20 thedopefishlives  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:54:44pm

re: #19 Bulworth

Next: Assad is a Christian and Syria a Christian country. Impeach Oboma if he attacks a Christian country. //

Well, he is a sooper-sekrit Muslim, so…

21 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:55:03pm

re: #13 Bulworth

Also, too: “We should be talking to Russia/China.” I coulda swore that not very long ago (We Are All Chechnyans, We Are All Georgians) the Obummer was being too weak in dealing with our great enemy Russia. //

The movement that wanted and got Bush to recess appointment John Bolton as UN ambassador is complaining about the lack of multilateralism. The hypocrisy here is sickening.

22 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:55:41pm

re: #19 Bulworth

Next: Assad is a Christian and Syria a Christian country. Impeach Oboma if he attacks a Christian country. //

The more lucid ones might even note that Syria is officially secular, and prefer that to an Islamist regime, not caring that this is inconsistent with their pushing a Christian theocracy in the US.

23 b_sharp  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:56:15pm

He’s saying Christians are more important than Muslims because they are Christians. Just another case of western assumed Christian privilege.

24 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:56:41pm
I think the failure of the Obama administration has been we haven’t engaged the Russians enough or the Chinese enough on this

Shit on a shingle, this is a quote from a Republican. Because blackity black black.

I can’t even.

25 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:57:53pm

America currently getting foreign policy advice from Rand Paul.

26 jaunte  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:58:17pm

re: #25 Gus

America currently getting foreign policy advice from Rand Paul.

Crowd reaction:

27 Iwouldprefernotto  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:58:20pm

From downstairs.

I didn’t join LGF to read derp.

28 thedopefishlives  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:58:40pm

re: #25 Gus

America currently getting foreign policy advice from Rand Paul Russia Today.

FTFY

29 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:58:41pm

Remember “Old Europe” when Bush had a much weaker case against Iraq. These guys only care about one thing and that’s making Obama look bad. If things get worse and more chemcial weapons are used, they’ll accuse Obama of standing idlely by. This isn’t about policy with them. It’s about a hatred they have for Obama because he represents something better than their primitive as fuck world view.

30 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:59:17pm

re: #24 erik_t

Shit on a shingle, this is a quote from a Republican. Because blackity black black.

I can’t even.

This is what happens when something real happens that needs a US response. The GOP platform of mindless opposition to all things put forth by Obama/the Democrats + MOAR TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH stands revealed for the nullity that it is.

31 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:59:43pm

re: #26 jaunte

In 1925 Halloween was really fucking scary.

32 Justanotherhuman  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 1:59:47pm

Plus…

Youtube Video

Go to hell, you racist bastard.

33 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:01:38pm

re: #27 Iwouldprefernotto

From downstairs.

I didn’t join LGF to read derp.

So did they join the Marines to help Iraqis attain a regime change? I mean, Iraq was relatively containable. No to a civil war but yes to nation building?

34 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:02:27pm

No. Wait. We invaded Iraq because of WMDs.

35 sagehen  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:03:32pm

So the million or so refugees in tent cities in Jordan (more than half of them are under 12) — we’re not supposed to care about them? Or that there’s more coming, and Jordan is stretched trying to take care of them, and Jordan is supposedly an important regional allly?

There’s another million in similar circumstances in Turkey, which is a NATO member. We have obligations there, surely?

Then the spillover into Iraq, which shares hundreds of miles of border with Syria. I seem to remember we have interests in Iraq. And Israel — doesn’t most of Congress have very strong opinions about Israel, which also shares some border there…

36 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:03:50pm

re: #31 Charles Johnson

In 1925 Halloween was really fucking scary.

And plenty racist.

37 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:10:01pm
38 jaunte  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:10:20pm

re: #33 Gus

So did they join the Marines to help Iraqis attain a regime change? I mean, Iraq was relatively containable. No to a civil war but yes to nation building?

Until service members begin showing their faces while openly defying orders, I’m going to assume those “I didn’t join up to (fill in the blank)” postings are being faked.
marlowwhite.com

39 Kragar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:11:53pm

re: #34 Gus

No. Wait. We invaded Iraq because of WMDs.

Doesn’t count. There was a Republican in the WH.

40 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:16:15pm

And now Greenwald is mocking Van Jones:

41 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:17:23pm

Awww, poor Teh GG, something important is happening and now suddenly nobody cares about your made-up nothingburger fauxrage.

42 Justanotherhuman  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:17:48pm

re: #40 Charles Johnson

And now Greenwald is mocking Van Jones:

[Embedded content]

Glenn is sooooo jealous…

43 jaunte  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:17:58pm

What is our supreme duty as nihilists?

44 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:19:52pm

re: #40 Charles Johnson

And now Greenwald is mocking Van Jones:

[Embedded content]

45 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:19:52pm

re: #43 jaunte

What is our supreme duty as nihilists?

Eyeblack, big clonky boots, long bangs, moping.

46 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:21:19pm

re: #43 jaunte

What is our supreme duty as nihilists?

As nihilists?

Give all parties in the Middle East tactical nukes, with delivery systems, and make popcorn.

47 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:22:03pm

re: #43 jaunte

What is our supreme duty as nihilists?

Playing hostage games with the debt ceiling and budget to try to defund Obamacare.

Impeaching Obama.

48 DobermanBoston  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:24:05pm

Hey, Assad’s an opthamologist too!

49 Kragar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:27:46pm

re: #43 jaunte

What is our supreme duty as nihilists?

BENGHAZI!

50 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:27:55pm

Oh, FFS. I shouldn’t even have gotten out of bed this morning.

51 Kragar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:29:29pm

Fox News host Tucker Carlson falls asleep on TV: ‘Is this honestly live?’

After host Alisyn Camerota finished reading the top headlines at around 7:30 a.m. ET, the cameras returned to the studio where Carlson was soundly sleeping on the infamous “curvy couch.”

“I don’t think we’re being good co-hosts right now,” Camerota quietly giggled, rousing Carlson from his slumber.

“I know we’re not on television so it doesn’t bother me,” Carlson said as he stretched. “Is this honestly live?”

“In the 15 years of this program, I don’t think that’s ever happened,” co-host Mike Jerrick pointed out.

52 Political Atheist  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:29:36pm

re: #50 CuriousLurker

Don’t let the likes of these guys get ya down. They live in little tiny angry brains. The rest of us get to appreciate our fellow humans.

53 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:30:59pm

re: #50 CuriousLurker

Oh, FFS. I shouldn’t even have gotten out of bed this morning.

Well, it’s too late now. Might as well join us monkeys flinging poo at the crazy humans.

54 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:31:04pm

re: #51 Kragar

Fox News host Tucker Carlson falls asleep on TV: ‘Is this honestly live?’

His brain falls asleep every day; I guess it was time for the rest of him to follow suit.

55 jaunte  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:31:09pm

re: #50 CuriousLurker

Well-done response on that other thread. I don’t have your patience.

56 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:31:28pm

re: #52 Political Atheist

Don’t let the likes of these guys get ya down. They live in little tiny angry brains. The rest of us get to appreciate our fellow humans.

Thanks. I know you do, it’s just… *shakes head*

It doesn’t help that it’s September and “the anniversary” is coming up again, y’know? It makes me feel all twitchy.

57 A Man for all Seasons  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:33:21pm

Crap! I forgot to record MTP this morning. I never do that..
On Campus you see either Obama or Paul bumper stickers. I have never seen a Romney sticker here. I find it strange seeing Paul stuff on a College Campus.. I thought the younger generation is suppose to be so much smarter than us. Nope..WTF are they thinking?

58 thedopefishlives  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:33:47pm

re: #56 CuriousLurker

Thanks. I know you do, it’s just… *shakes head*

It doesn’t help that it’s September and “the anniversary” is coming up again, y’know? It makes me feel all twitchy.

It’d be nice if we could incorporate the lessons learned since then, both good and bad. The world has changed greatly since that clear September Tuesday.

59 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:33:55pm

re: #55 jaunte

Well-done response on that other thread. I don’t have your patience.

Yeah, I don’t know how I managed that. I guess because I get the sense that, as annoying as he is, the man means well (unlike some of the purely hateful wingnuts). He also clearly doesn’t realize what’s expected here, heh.

60 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:34:21pm

re: #57 A Man for all Seasons

Crap! I forgot to record MTP this morning. I never do that..
On Campus you see either Obama or Paul bumper stickers. I have never seen a Romney sticker here. I find it strange seeing Paul stuff on a College Campus.. I thought the younger generation is suppose to be so much smarter than us. Nope..WTF are they thinking?

Allow me to demonstrate the sum total of the thought process of a young Paul backer (either flavor of Paul):

…somethingsomethingsomethingsomethingPOTsomethingsomething…

That’s it. That’s all there is.

61 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:34:52pm
62 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:35:23pm

I like the Islamic libertarian.

63 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:35:45pm

re: #58 thedopefishlives

It’d be nice if we could incorporate the lessons learned since then, both good and bad. The world has changed greatly since that clear September Tuesday.

Indeed it has changed much, and oh boy did we ever learn a lot.

64 thedopefishlives  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:35:52pm

re: #60 erik_t

Allow me to demonstrate the sum total of the thought process of a young Paul backer (either flavor of Paul):

…somethingsomethingsomethingsomethingPOTsomethingsomething…

That’s it. That’s all there is.

Not entirely true. A lot of my recent-college-graduate friends are Paulians because he supposedly endorses the “libertarian” point of view. It makes me wonder how much they actually know about him.

65 Backwoods_Sleuth  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:36:00pm

re: #40 Charles Johnson

And now Greenwald is mocking Van Jones:

[Embedded content]

New acronym, just for GG:
AINO
“American In Name Only” (and only when it’s convenient for his narrative)

66 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:36:26pm

re: #62 Gus

I like the Islamic libertarian.

You mean the guys in Somalia? //

67 lawhawk  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:38:05pm
The Arab League calls for U.N. Security Council to “take all the deterrent and needed measures” against “crimes of genocide” in Syria.

Assad doesn’t care who’s getting killed by his forces in Syria. He wanted to eliminate the rebel forces arrayed against him. Moderate, Islamist. Christian. Muslim.

Thing is that Rand Paul doesn’t know squat about which he opines. He’s entitled to an opinion, but he’s removing all doubt as to his lack of knowledge.

Assad supports Hizbullah. Assad provides sanctuary for Hamas. Uncontroverted. Neither has a place for Christians.

That some Christians in Syria have aligned with Assad out of fear that the Sunni Muslim majority may take revenge against the Alawite clan and their hangers-on ignores that Assad will turn on anyone and everyone who threatens his continued power.

68 urbanmeemaw  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:38:30pm

re: #39 Kragar

Must add a white Republican.

69 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:38:42pm

re: #59 CuriousLurker

Yeah, I don’t know how I managed that. I guess because I get the sense that, as annoying as he is, the man means well (unlike some of the purely hateful wingnuts). He also clearly doesn’t realize what’s expected here, heh.

That the sense I have as well. It’s depressing, really. If ones only sources of information are RW propaganda, invincible ignorance is the likely result.

70 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:38:55pm

re: #64 thedopefishlives

Not entirely true. A lot of my recent-college-graduate friends are Paulians because he supposedly endorses the “libertarian” point of view. It makes me wonder how much they actually know about him.

Which, in my experience, mostly is a codeword for marijuana legalization. Little sense though that makes.

71 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:39:23pm

re: #66 CuriousLurker

You mean the guys in Somalia? //

Iyad El-Baghdadi… #61.

72 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:39:55pm

re: #64 thedopefishlives

Not entirely true. A lot of my recent-college-graduate friends are Paulians because he supposedly endorses the “libertarian” point of view. It makes me wonder how much they actually know about him.

Or how much they really get what political ‘libertarianism’ usually amounts to.

73 urbanmeemaw  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:41:19pm

re: #43 jaunte

Award Snowbros the Pulitzer and the Nobel Peace Prize and never ever ever ever (h/t Taylor Swift) question anything Snowden or Greenwald say ever again.

74 A Man for all Seasons  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:45:34pm

re: #69 EPR-radar

That the sense I have as well. It’s depressing, really. If ones only sources of information are RW propaganda, invincible ignorance is the likely result.

I live across the street from the OU Poly-Science building. Almost every day I wish I were a fly on the wall. Obama vs. Paul in the debates..I doubt if there is any support for RWers here. How lucid is the Paul argument?

75 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:45:42pm

Already hearing wingnuts push this line of thinking. “Assad has been protecting the Christians against the Muslims! Al-Q has every reason to stage a false flag attack to fool us into removing him from power!!!”

76 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:46:13pm

re: #58 thedopefishlives

It’d be nice if we could incorporate the lessons learned since then, both good and bad. The world has changed greatly since that clear September Tuesday.

Just for the record, we Muslims have learned a lot too. Probably the most important thing we learned that we can’t just stick together and keep our heads down, ignoring the fundies/extremists in the hopes that they’ll shut up and/or no one will notice them and lump us all together.

We have to be out there defining ourselves, participating in discussions, etc.—if we don’t, then we run the risk of letting Muslim extremists & American bigots (like Geller et al) define us. The imams in our mosques need to make sure they’re making it crystal clear that things like bigotry & terrorism aren’t acceptable. The list goes on…

Gawd, I need coffee realllllly bad. BBIAB

77 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:47:20pm

re: #71 Gus

Iyad El-Baghdadi… #61.

Ah, okay! ;)

78 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:47:51pm
79 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:48:13pm

re: #57 A Man for all Seasons

Crap! I forgot to record MTP this morning. I never do that..
On Campus you see either Obama or Paul bumper stickers. I have never seen a Romney sticker here. I find it strange seeing Paul stuff on a College Campus.. I thought the younger generation is suppose to be so much smarter than us. Nope..WTF are they thinking?

A lot of younger people unfortunately hear Ron Paul say he’s anti drug war and ignore the fact that the other 99.9% of his message is pure reactionary bullshit. I appreciate my generation but too many of us have bought the Paul bullshit hook line and sinker. I’m actually in favor of legalizing all drugs and I’d like to live in a world where marijuana usage isn’t equated with being a lazy bum but Ron Paul genuinely sickens me as does his son.

80 ProTARDISLiberal  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:49:55pm

Umm, what the hell is going on?

81 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:50:27pm

I’m actually listening to wingnuts and dudebros alike make the case for either inaction or even going so far as to suggest that Obama should be supporting Assad against the rebels. They’re absolutely convinced now that the rebels are all members of Al-Q and that the best thing America can do is support the despot against the terrorists. Or to just continue sitting on our hands and wait to see which “lesser evil” wins.

It’s hard not to see that Cold War realpolitiks being pushed as the “moral” choice.

82 SnowdenBaggerVance  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:50:27pm

Rand Paul has his own style of word salad.

83 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:52:20pm

re: #81 Targetpractice

I’m actually listening to wingnuts and dudebros alike make the case for either inaction or even going so far as to suggest that Obama should be supporting Assad against the rebels. They’re absolutely convinced now that the rebels are all members of Al-Q and that the best thing America can do is support the despot against the terrorists. Or to just continue sitting on our hands and wait to see which “lesser evil” wins.

It’s hard not to see that Cold War realpolitiks being pushed as the “moral” choice.

I wish I could be shocked by the wingnut embrace of Assad but then again as I said earlier, we saw them embrace Qaddafi when Obama and NATO intervened in Libya too. I’m sure next on the counter will be them embracing the Ayatollah in Iran if Obama strongly embraces secular center-left opposition.

84 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:52:22pm
85 Political Atheist  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:52:38pm

re: #76 CuriousLurker

One positive sign is mainstream awareness ans a little bit of appreciation for Ramadan. That and a really interesting documentary I saw about the religion. How Islam did not deify the messenger as so many other religions do. The inherent humility there is telling.

86 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:54:15pm

re: #83 HappyWarrior

I wish I could be shocked by the wingnut embrace of Assad but then again as I said earlier, we saw them embrace Qaddafi when Obama and NATO intervened in Libya too. I’m sure next on the counter will be them embracing the Ayatollah in Iran if Obama strongly embraces secular center-left opposition.

The upcoming debate in Congress will have its moments of supreme irony. Personally, I can’t wait to see Republicans putting Russian propaganda into the Congressional Record.

87 Lidane  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:54:24pm
88 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:55:26pm
89 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:56:19pm

re: #81 Targetpractice

I’m actually listening to wingnuts and dudebros alike make the case for either inaction or even going so far as to suggest that Obama should be supporting Assad against the rebels. They’re absolutely convinced now that the rebels are all members of Al-Q and that the best thing America can do is support the despot against the terrorists. Or to just continue sitting on our hands and wait to see which “lesser evil” wins.

It’s hard not to see that Cold War realpolitiks being pushed as the “moral” choice.

The position you attribute to wingnuts and dudebros is very similar to mine.

I’m not a pacifist, I just don’t know who to kill.

90 piratedan  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:57:25pm

re: #80 ProTARDISLiberal

the Utility folks in charge have fucked up by the numbers are are going to require some serious fucking measures to clean it up, if it can be cleaned up,

91 Kragar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:58:39pm

re: #88 Charles Johnson

Image: Gohmert.jpg

92 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:59:04pm

re: #89 Decatur Deb

The position you attribute to wingnuts and dudebros is very similar to mine.

I’m not a pacifist, I just don’t who to kill.

Kill them all, God will know his own.

93 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 2:59:18pm

re: #86 EPR-radar

The upcoming debate in Congress will have its moments of supreme irony. Personally, I can’t wait to see Republicans putting Russian propaganda into the Congressional Record.

Why not. Many of them have discovered a kinship with Vladdy over their shared hatred of Gays.

94 Lidane  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:00:02pm

re: #91 Kragar

Image: Gohmert.jpg

GOHMERT!

95 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:00:52pm

re: #89 Decatur Deb

The position you attribute to wingnuts and dudebros is very similar to mine.

I’m not a pacifist, I just don’t know who to kill.

I’m not exactly thrilled about taking action either, but the alternative is to set a precedent that chemical weapons are not that big of a deal when used against civilians. That we don’t care whether they use them, just so long as they’re not used against us.

96 HappyWarrior  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:00:53pm

re: #94 Lidane

GOHMERT!

[Embedded content]

I just realized this but Louie looks like Champ Kind from Anchorman. Only Champ is more intelligent.

97 thedopefishlives  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:01:03pm

re: #94 Lidane

GOHMERT!

Translation: “I don’t know and, truthfully, I don’t give a f—-. Next question?”

98 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:01:11pm

re: #94 Lidane

GOHMERT!

[Embedded content]

Looks like Bert from Sesame Street.

99 Justanotherhuman  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:01:49pm

re: #94 Lidane

GOHMERT!

[Embedded content]

Looks like he pissed his pants.

100 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:02:11pm

re: #98 Targetpractice

Bert has more grey matter than Gohmert.

101 Kragar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:03:02pm

re: #99 Justanotherhuman

Looks like he pissed his pants.

“I MADE POOPIES!”

102 piratedan  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:03:45pm

re: #100 PhillyPretzel

Bert has more grey matter than Gohmert.

and you don’t have to notice Reince Preibus’ hand up his ass either….

103 A Man for all Seasons  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:04:35pm

re: #89 Decatur Deb

The position you attribute to have wingnuts and dudebros is very similar to mine.

I’m not a pacifist, I just don’t who to kill.

True dat..I never understood why Jordan wanted to be a Marine. He is a good athlete and I so wanted him to play College sports. I have worried about PSDT effects from his involvement in putting down Fallujah but he seems well adjusted back home and Married to his high school sweetheart. He did drink alot at first but his wife took care of that.

104 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:06:15pm

re: #95 Targetpractice

I’m not exactly thrilled about taking action either, but the alternative is to set a precedent that chemical weapons are not that big of a deal when used against civilians. That we don’t care whether they use them, just so long as they’re not used against us.

That might be the heart of it. Chemical weapons are an emotional stalking horse for other drivers. Is it worse to poison a child or to deliver a hundred pounds of HE to a wedding via semi-smart ordnance? The immorality is in the slaughter, not in the knife.

105 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:07:41pm
106 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:08:34pm

re: #104 Decatur Deb

That might be the heart of it. Chemical weapons are an emotional stalking horse for other drivers. Is it worse to poison a child or to deliver a hundred pounds of HE to a wedding via semi-smart ordnance? The immorality is in the slaughter, not in the knife.

By that measure, there’s little difference between a nuclear device and a very large bomb like the MOAB. Both cause a great deal of damage and kill numerous people in the blast. You could easily simulate the destructive potential of a nuke with great quantities of chemical explosives, though the size of such make them inconvenient.

107 lawhawk  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:10:31pm

re: #80 ProTARDISLiberal

TEPCO can’t control the situation, the Japanese government is out of its league, and international assistance is going to be needed quickly.

TEPCO can’t control the water leaking to the ground, or into the Pacific Ocean. They built temporary storage tanks that are now leaking. They have yet to get sufficient access to the storage pools or the reactor chambers to begin dismantling the reactors, and they haven’t yet been able to secure the facilities against the elements. TEPCO can’t even provide a secure and reliable power supply to the makeshift backup systems that were cobbled together following the tsunami.

And then there’s the fact that TEPCO has continually underplayed the problems, and ignored safety concerns - from the time of construction to the present. That includes the sea walls that weren’t sufficiently tall to withstand the tsunami to the design of the backup systems.

It’s a mess, and all it will take is another major earthquake or tsunami in the area to send radioactive plumes into the atmosphere or in to the Pacific in significant amounts.

108 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:11:24pm

re: #106 Targetpractice

By that measure, there’s little difference between a nuclear device and a very large bomb like the MOAB. Both cause a great deal of damage and kill numerous people in the blast. You could easily simulate the destructive potential of a nuke with great quantities of chemical explosives, though the size of such make them inconvenient.

Precisely. The firebombing of Japanese cities was no more humane than Hiroshima. On the raw count, it was less so.

109 Iwouldprefernotto  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:13:08pm

re: #105 Charles Johnson

[Embedded content]

I think it should read: “I have no idea what I’m saying…”


“and never have.”

110 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:15:39pm

re: #108 Decatur Deb

Precisely. The firebombing of Japanese cities was no more humane than Hiroshima. On the raw count, it was less so.

Indeed. What makes the use of such weapons so horrific is the aftereffects, the insidious and indiscriminate nature of radiation and how even those who were not directly caught in the blast will still die slow, cruel deaths as consequence of being in the same area.

Suppose the Assad regime were using biological weapons instead and the casualties were not dead in minutes or hours from chemical gases, but instead were packed into hospitals as they coughed up blood and broke out in sores. Would we expect people to be as indifferent to the suffering?

111 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:16:26pm

Today’s baking.

Kugelhopf with rum-soaked Michigan cherries.

112 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:21:02pm
113 b_sharp  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:21:33pm

re: #111 Vicious Babushka

Today’s baking.

Kugelhopf with rum-soaked Michigan cherries.

That looks really bad, you need to send it to me.

114 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:23:06pm

re: #110 Targetpractice

Indeed. What makes the use of such weapons so horrific is the aftereffects, the insidious and indiscriminate nature of radiation and how even those who were not directly caught in the blast will still die slow, cruel deaths as consequence of being in the same area.

Suppose the Assad regime were using biological weapons instead and the casualties were not dead in minutes or hours from chemical gases, but instead were packed into hospitals as they coughed up blood and broke out in sores. Would we expect people to be as indifferent to the suffering?

You’re trying to create a calculus of horror based on suffering, and no one can (or wants ) do the math on the agony of individuals at ground zero vs the fringe of an incendiary firestorm. If you want to argue morality, don’t argue physics, chemistry, and biology. I don’t want to see us start another deathfest, and don’t care if it’s about bludgeons or ion cannons.

115 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:23:49pm

I couldn’t make up my mind between apple strudel and apple pie.

So tomorrow:
Apple strudel and blueberry pie!

It will be a lot of work and standing on my feet, I have to rest my feet now and drink off some of that liquid that I drained from the cherries.

116 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:24:04pm

re: #114 Decatur Deb

You’re trying to create a calculus of horror based on suffering, and no one can (or wants )do the math on the agony of individuals at ground zero vs the fringe of an incendiary firestorm. If you want to argue morality, don’t argue physics, chemistry, and biology. I don’t want to see us start another deathfest, and don’t care if it’s about bludgeons or ion cannons.

There has to be a line in the sand, and if not chemical weapons, then where?

117 Iwouldprefernotto  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:24:07pm

re: #112 Charles Johnson

[Embedded content]

But he’s white.

118 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:26:19pm

re: #116 Targetpractice

There has to be a line in the sand, and if not chemical weapons, then where?

My line in the sand is not to wage war except as a last resort.

119 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:29:29pm

re: #114 Decatur Deb

You’re trying to create a calculus of horror based on suffering, and no one can (or wants ) do the math on the agony of individuals at ground zero vs the fringe of an incendiary firestorm. If you want to argue morality, don’t argue physics, chemistry, and biology. I don’t want to see us start another deathfest, and don’t care if it’s about bludgeons or ion cannons.

I think it’s entirely reasonable to draw distinctions between weapons that can be targeted and aimed by their very nature, and those that cannot. Improper use of the former can and often does have horrifying results, but any use of the latter shows that the user is accepting before the action that unpredictable effects will result, and untargetted folks will die.

It’s the reckless disregard for third parties that makes the use of NBC (but especially biological and chemical) weapons so loathsome.

Our criminal justice system draws moral distinctions between intentional and unintentional killings of innocent third parties. I consider this to be a similar problem.

120 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:31:38pm

re: #118 Decatur Deb

My line in the sand is not to wage war except as a last resort.

“Last resort”? Against what? Would you join the isolationists who say that America should never engage in war unless war is brought to her doorstep? That we have no business in worldly affairs because our only obligation is to defend ourselves?

121 blueraven  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:32:50pm

re: #112 Charles Johnson

[Embedded content]

Then Bush let the public and the media shame him into not playing anymore. Dumb idea. I want my president clear headed, and spending every waking minute in the WH is not conducive to that.

Where the hell else can he go?

Sometimes you have to ignore the critics and do what you need for sanity.

122 I Earned My Sodomy Merit Badge!  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:33:07pm

Are we going to be seeing wingnuts protesting war now?

123 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:33:33pm

re: #95 Targetpractice

I’m not exactly thrilled about taking action either, but the alternative is to set a precedent that chemical weapons are not that big of a deal when used against civilians. That we don’t care whether they use them, just so long as they’re not used against us.

We shouldn’t do anything other than say Assad should be ousted, then, and make that the end goal. Otherwise “we’ll rough you up a bit, but not take you out” becomes the price for using chemical weapons.

And then we’re in regime change, which means we’re in nation-building.

I feel the urge to act too. I feel the urge to act against North Korea, with it’s millions of people destined for lives along the line of starvation, minds assaulted with propaganda and constant exhortations of fear. I just don’t know how, in either circumstance, we can actually get an end that I’d be comfortable with. It depends on the Syrian opposite being truly moderate and being able to win the sectarian portion of the civil war, post-ouster of Assad, against the extremists. I really don’t know enough about that part of the world to analyze our chances of doing that, but even in the best-case scenario, we’re depending hugely on outcomes that we can only influence, not control.

124 lawhawk  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:33:40pm

re: #110 Targetpractice

Yeah, we would.

Chemical weapons and their after effects can linger in affected populations for decades after exposure.

Just talk to anyone suffering from Gulf War syndrome, which was due in part to low-dose chemical weapon (organophosphates like Sarin) exposure from the allied forces striking Saddam’s WMD facilities and releasing the toxins into the air downwind. Other effects were due to the anti-toxins used to combat the nerve agent effects.

The immediate toll of over 1,400 killed by the sarin attack will likely be added to by those who die prematurely from the effects, or suffer lasting symptoms above and beyond those of living in a combat zone.

We don’t shrink from using napalm or conventional explosives despite the horrific toll on the human body. So why think that chemical weapons or biological weapons would make people any more or less indifferent?

Perhaps we’ve gotten so far removed from WWI and the mass casualties of the Western Front and the hundreds of thousands incapacitated by mustard gas. Or that even Saddam Hussein killed tens of thousands of Iraqis in the Anfal campaign, and the world looked on with indifference. They didn’t take action then. The body count grew. That was but a memory before Bush the Elder went into Iraq on the basis of the invasion of Kuwait. The world should have eliminated him then; but didn’t.

And yes, I know the recent revelations about US indifference to Saddam’s usage of chemical weapons against the Iranians. That doesn’t excuse or ignore that heinous choice. If anything, it’s all the more damning - and one that we should not repeat by indifference or willful choice to ignore.

125 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:34:23pm

re: #119 erik_t

I think it’s entirely reasonable to draw distinctions between weapons that can be targeted and aimed by their very nature, and those that cannot. Improper use of the former can and often does have horrifying results, but any use of the latter shows that the user is accepting before the action that unpredictable effects will result, and untargetted folks will die.

It’s the reckless disregard for third parties that makes the use of NBC (but especially biological and chemical) weapons so loathsome.

Our criminal justice system draws moral distinctions between intentional and unintentional killings of innocent third parties. I consider this to be a similar problem.

Straining hard here to think of a conventional war that was overly concerned with third parties. Perhaps the ‘smart weapons’ illusion leads to this self-comforting distinction. When you pull the first trigger, you have bought into a whole bunch of ‘unpredictable effects’ that can go on for decades.

126 lawhawk  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:36:24pm

re: #111 Vicious Babushka

Nice. We’ve got Zaide’s baking for the challahs. The Mrs. is doing a red wine cake, a honey cake and brownies. And I’ve figured out that I’m going to riff on a tsimmis - a beef stew with apricots, cranberries, and root vegies, and then a roast chicken with Moroccan spiced potatoes and carrots.

127 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:36:28pm
128 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:37:55pm

re: #123 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

We shouldn’t do anything other than say Assad should be ousted, then, and make that the end goal. Otherwise “we’ll rough you up a bit, but not take you out” becomes the price for using chemical weapons.

And then we’re in regime change, which means we’re in nation-building.

I feel the urge to act too. I feel the urge to act against North Korea, with it’s millions of people destined for lives along the line of starvation, minds assaulted with propaganda and constant exhortations of fear. I just don’t know how, in either circumstance, we can actually get an end that I’d be comfortable with. It depends on the Syrian opposite being truly moderate and being able to win the sectarian portion of the civil war, post-ouster of Assad, against the extremists. I really don’t know enough about that part of the world to analyze our chances of doing that, but even in the best-case scenario, we’re depending hugely on outcomes that we can only influence, not control.

Would that we had not spent the last decade fighting in Iraq, else this would not be so difficult a choice. We now shrink from the question of removing despots from power because we just don’t want to be bothered by the cost of what comes after. So now when WMDs not only exist, but are used, we try to comfort ourselves by declaring that there’s no “good” choice, so we’ll simply make no choice at all and hope that nothing bad comes of our inaction.

129 blueraven  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:38:28pm

re: #121 blueraven

Then Bush let the public and the media shame him into not playing anymore. Dumb idea. I want my president clear headed, and spending every waking minute in the WH is not conducive to that.

Where the hell else can he go?

Sometimes you have to ignore the critics and do what you need for sanity.

EDIT…But yeah, the optics of that clip are cringe worthy. The transition from terrorism to the brag about his swing. WTH was he thinking?

130 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:39:53pm

re: #120 Targetpractice

“Last resort”? Against what? Would you join the isolationists who say that America should never engage in war unless war is brought to her doorstep? That we have no business in worldly affairs because our only obligation is to defend ourselves?

If an evil cannot be prevented by any other means, and only if the evil prevented is proportional to the evil of war itself, might I begin to think of our business in worldly affairs.

(phone call)

131 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:41:21pm

re: #125 Decatur Deb

Straining hard here to think of a conventional war that was overly concerned with third parties. Perhaps the ‘smart weapons’ illusion leads to this self-comforting distinction. When you pull the first trigger, you have bought into a whole bunch of ‘unpredictable effects’ that can go on for decades.

I’m not talking about smart weapons, however you choose to define them. I’m talking about even things like artillery, that you can point in the general direction of the enemy. Yes, sometimes you will hit something a few degrees or a few hundred yards off target. But you were legitimately using a lot of discretion in where that shell went: fire a hundred thousand shells and one, or none, of them will hit further away than X% of the target.

In contrast: there were chemical weapon attacks in the First World War in which the wind shifted and a gas cloud quite literally went back the wrong way, drifting over friendly lines and killing both friendly troops and civilians.

We are talking about shades of gray, as is usually the case in the real world. It just so happens that chemical and biological weapons are a very, very dark shade of gray.

132 freetoken  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:41:21pm

re: #128 Targetpractice

The New World Order doesn’t seem to be much of an order at all.

133 freetoken  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:43:59pm

Idealism has all but vanished, at least from foreign policy debates.

Except among the Dudebros, where it is all ideal all the time.

134 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:44:28pm

The way I see it, the use of chemical weapons is a bona fide atrocity that should get an international response via the UN. Regime change at the minimum, and up to and including UN occupation and rule of Syria for however many decades it takes for enough factions to agree to tolerate each other existence, if that’s what it really takes.

Since that option is apparently off the table, we are pretty much looking at unilateral US action. The chance of such US action having a net positive outcome is so low that US non-action in that face of that reality seems perfectly reasonable to me.

FWIW, I’m likely to be comfortable with either possible outcome of the US congressional vote. The arguments for doing something and for doing nothing are both respectable, IMO.

135 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:45:13pm

re: #128 Targetpractice

Would that we had not spent the last decade fighting in Iraq, else this would not be so difficult a choice. We now shrink from the question of removing despots from power because we just don’t want to be bothered by the cost of what comes after.

It’s not because I don’t want to be bothered by the cost, it’s because we may do more harm than good. I don’t really think Iraq is a hell of a lot better now than under Saddam. For some, it’s a lot worse. A lot of sectarian violence went down, hundreds of thousands of people died, and they still have a justice system where you can be ‘disappeared’ for political positions.

Afghanistan is Afghanistan, and there’s been remarkable progress but the Taliban is still there, many of our warlord allies are absolute assholes, and the situation is not stable.

Maybe Syria’s rebels can manage a stable state, but what if we fire rockets on Assad, knock out his stuff, and then the civil war just grinds on, sectarian now? Do we continue to engage on the side of the ‘moderates’?

So now when WMDs not only exist, but are used, we try to comfort ourselves by declaring that there’s no “good” choice, so we’ll simply make no choice at all and hope that nothing bad comes of our inaction.

No, deciding not to act is making a choice. It is sometimes the right choice. I don’t now if it is here. I’m not competent to analyze the problem. Aside from Assad, I can’t name another Syrian. I have no clue. But I don’t think that we can just fire some missiles at Assad and call it a day; if we strike and then he beats the rebels anyway, what did we actually do?

136 Lidane  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:45:24pm


137 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:45:35pm

re: #134 EPR-radar

FWIW, I’m likely to be comfortable with either possible outcome of the US congressional vote. The arguments for doing something and for doing nothing are both respectable, IMO.

Not 100% sure about the rest of it, but you absolutely get an upding for this part.

138 freetoken  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:47:27pm

The Old South, for which the Pauls seem to long:

Bones dug up at Florida reform school

Teams of searchers recovered human bones from the sands of Florida Panhandle woodlands yesterday in a “boot hill” graveyard where juveniles who disappeared from a notorious Old South reform school more than a half-century ago are believed to have been secretly buried.

[…]

Some former residents of Dozier, now in their 60s and 70s, have told of brutal beatings and boys — mostly black juveniles — disappearing without explanation more than 50 years ago. Blood relatives of some of the boys have given DNA samples, to be matched against evidence taken from the skeletal remains.

[…]

“People didn’t want to talk about it, and we found that particularly among black families,” he said. “That’s what racism does. It beats you down, and you think you don’t matter, so you won’t speak up.”

139 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:48:05pm

re: #135 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

It’s not because I don’t want to be bothered by the cost, it’s because we may do more harm than good. I don’t really think Iraq is a hell of a lot better now than under Saddam. For some, it’s a lot worse. A lot of sectarian violence went down, hundreds of thousands of people died, and they still have a justice system where you can be ‘disappeared’ for political positions.

Afghanistan is Afghanistan, and there’s been remarkable progress but the Taliban is still there, many of our warlord allies are absolute assholes, and the situation is not stable.

Maybe Syria’s rebels can manage a stable state, but what if we fire rockets on Assad, knock out his stuff, and then the civil war just grinds on, sectarian now? Do we continue to engage on the side of the ‘moderates’?

No, deciding not to act is making a choice. It is sometimes the right choice. I don’t now if it is here. I’m not competent to analyze the problem. Aside from Assad, I can’t name another Syrian. I have no clue. But I don’t think that we can just fire some missiles at Assad and call it a day; if we strike and then he beats the rebels anyway, what did we actually do?

Then we make regime change the goal. Else we sit back and accept chemical weapons as a valid weapon in future wars. Is that what we want to set as the standard going forward? Run down America until it can’t stomach another war, then break out the really bad weapons and force the most powerful military in the world to sit by and debate the morality of doing anything? If the rebels snuck a nuke into Damascus tomorrow and atomized it, would we shrug our shoulders and say that it didn’t matter how the people died, just that they’re dead and that’s war?

140 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:50:36pm

re: #139 Targetpractice

Then we make regime change the goal. Else we sit back and accept chemical weapons as a valid weapon in future wars.

With respect, I reject this absolutist dichotomy. Chemical weapons were once perceived as a “valid weapon” of war; they now are not. This is not a one-way street. It’s a lot easier to go one direction than the other, yes, but let’s not pretend that this decision will slant the entire course of human history for the next ten thousand years.

141 Bulworth  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:52:26pm

re: #127 Gus

I’m guessing Pammy’s got a cousin who collects military uniforms.

142 rosiee  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:53:10pm

Why should the USA act alone? Again Saudi Arabia is having America do it’s heavy lifting.

143 Political Atheist  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:53:14pm

re: #123 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

Not sure taking Assad out militarily without any grip on what replaces him makes me hesitate about your plan.

Speculating a bit. This might be long game/short game. Short-Take out some valuable military assets, like perhaps the units that launched this attack.Or if Congress says no just keep the gun pointed, right offshore. Long-Also stay on the UN to get a warrant for his arrest like the guilty in Serbia years ago. Methodical. Let the critics bitch. Let the media second guess. Let the GOP cosplay Fox.

Obama has better data than we. Saying that about Bush would be a cringer. Not this President.

144 blueraven  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:53:21pm

Joe Lieberman has a sad that Obama is going to congress.

145 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:53:47pm

re: #140 erik_t

With respect, I reject this absolutist dichotomy. Chemical weapons were once perceived as a “valid weapon” of war; they now are not. This is not a one-way street. It’s a lot easier to go one direction than the other, yes, but let’s not pretend that this decision will slant the entire course of human history for the next ten thousand years.

They were accepted until the death toll was so horrific that the last war to use them openly ended with all sides struck dumb with the carnage they’d wrought. That the next major war saw the creation and preparation against new weapons, but never the open use of them for fear of retaliation. We now sit ready to undo that by saying that the death toll just isn’t high enough to justify don’t anything about it.

146 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:54:17pm
147 Bulworth  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:54:58pm

re: #127 Gus

The “no fight for AlQ” business seems a little much.

148 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:55:19pm

re: #141 Bulworth

I’m guessing Pammy’s got a cousin who collects military uniforms.

Nah, I think it’s real.


Manning, Snowden, now this.

149 freetoken  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:55:31pm

More evidence of Saudi puppetry (* cough *):

In refugee camp, anger at Obama

As President Barack Obama’s announcement that he was postponing U.S. missile strikes against the Syrian regime hit the Zaatari refugee camp, so did anger and fear.

“If they’re going to strike, let them strike once and for all and bring the regime down,” grumbled Um Hafiz, who fled with her husband and five children from their village near Syria’s southern city of Daara in January.

Other residents said Sunday that they worried that Obama’s decision to first seek congressional authorization for a U.S. military operation would so embolden Syrian President Bashar Assad that the dictator might even dare to attack Zaatari, a major recruiting ground for rebel fighters located about 5 miles inside Jordan.

“We were happy when we first heard that the U.S. would attack, but then when it was postponed, we were afraid that Bashar would attack the camp,” said Raad Zoubi, 23, who has called the dusty, sun-stricken swath of tents and prefabricated metal huts home for the last year. “People are angry, but when the Americans do attack, we will be happy they do.”

Expectations were running high in Zaatari late last week as the United States signaled that cruise missile strikes were imminent, asserting that it had determined “with high confidence” that the Assad regime was behind an alleged Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack on a rebel-held Damascus suburb that killed at least 1,429 civilians.

Camp residents heard Obama reveal his decision to postpone the operation on live broadcasts of his Rose Garden announcement carried by Arabic-language television channels received over the satellite dishes that sprout like mushrooms atop the dwellings lining Zaatari’s trash-strewn streets.

“Everybody was watching,” recalled Zoubi, 23, a baker from Taybeh, a village outside Daara, where the anti-Assad protests that led to the brutal civil war erupted on March 18, 2011.

[…]

150 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:55:51pm
151 sagehen  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:57:31pm

re: #121 blueraven

Sometimes you have to ignore the critics and do what you need for sanity.

And you think GOLF induces sanity? Golf makes people crazy, anybody who’s ever known a golfer knows that. Just look at those ridiculous pants!!

//

(I’m with Mark Twain on this — it’s a nice walk spoiled.)

152 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:58:14pm
153 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:58:54pm

re: #145 Targetpractice

They were accepted until the death toll was so horrific that the last war to use them openly ended with all sides struck dumb with the carnage they’d wrought. That the next major war saw the creation and preparation against new weapons, but never the open use of them for fear of retaliation. We now sit ready to undo that by saying that the death toll just isn’t high enough to justify don’t anything about it.

We’ve used what are now considered WMDs since then. So did at least one side in the Iran-Iraq war; we sat on our hands.

This principle has been flexible enough that I’m not willing to declare we must absolutely respond. If we can respond in a way that actually helps people on the ground, whatever that means, and helps the world around them? Superb.

However: I am not going to blow off my big toe for an international legal concept that has been violated multiple times since the initial agreement, with no apparent effect on the basic future strength of that concept. Russia isn’t going to turn around and drop a thousand tons of VX on Chechnya just because we don’t throw fifty Tomahawks at Assad.

154 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 3:59:35pm

re: #152 Gus

[Embedded content]

Well, they may have a point. So many dipshits joined up for the college benefits, thinking it was 4 years behind a desk or hauling cargo around, then out. “I didn’t sign up to fight!”

155 Political Atheist  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:00:18pm

re: #145 Targetpractice

Somewhere weapons controls and non proliferation has to stick. The fact it fails should not be taken as reason to stop trying. There are positive examples. Look at how many nukes and delivery systems are gone thanks to SALT. Libya and South Africa unwound WMD programs under supervision.

North Korea was a huge setback.

156 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:00:50pm

re: #153 erik_t

We’ve used what are now considered WMDs since then. So did at least one side in the Iran-Iraq war; we sat on our hands.

This principle has been flexible enough that I’m not willing to declare we must absolutely respond. If we can respond in a way that actually helps people on the ground, whatever that means, and helps the world around them? Superb.

However: I am not going to blow off my big toe for an international legal concept that has been violated multiple times since the initial agreement, with no apparent effect on the basic future strength of that concept. Russia isn’t going to turn around and drop a thousand tons of VX on Chechnya just because we don’t throw fifty Tomahawks at Assad.

And suppose they did? What would we say? That they’ve engaged in actions that we…we…oh right, we sat by and watched because it wasn’t Americans who were getting gassed.

157 Bulworth  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:01:03pm

Well, there were probably a few military folks who didn’t want in on Iraq. I seem to recall one who went off for Canada or something, very celebrated by the Democracy Now! team. Forgot his name.

158 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:01:07pm

re: #154 Targetpractice

Well, they may have a point. So many dipshits joined up for the college benefits, thinking it was 4 years behind a desk or hauling cargo around, then out. “I didn’t sign up to fight!”

…in, like, the year 2000.

Anyone who joined up in the last decade while thinking they’d never fight anyone but the Soviets in the Fulda Gap… well, they probably didn’t need those college benefits anyway.

159 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:01:36pm

re: #158 erik_t

…in, like, the year 2000.

Anyone who joined up in the last decade while thinking they’d never fight anyone but the Soviets in the Fulda Gap… well, they probably didn’t need those college benefits anyway.

True.

160 erik_t  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:02:01pm

re: #156 Targetpractice

And suppose they did? What would we say? That they’ve engaged in actions that we…we…oh right, we sat by and watched because it wasn’t Americans who were getting gassed.

They could say that right now, regardless of what we do in Syria.

Unless you have a time machine with which we can stop Saddam multiple times in the late 1980s and early 1990s, that ship has already sailed.

161 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:03:38pm

re: #156 Targetpractice

And suppose they did? What would we say? That they’ve engaged in actions that we…we…oh right, we sat by and watched because it wasn’t Americans who were getting gassed.

To be brutally realistic, the US response if Russia were to start gassing Chechen rebels en masse would be limited to a sternly worded letter and ending some trade deals.

162 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:04:22pm

re: #160 erik_t

They could say that right now, regardless of what we do in Syria.

Unless you have a time machine with which we can stop Saddam multiple times in the late 1980s and early 1990s, that ship has already sailed.

Then shit, I don’t know why we’re even discussing this. Oh right, Syria’s not our client state this time around.

163 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:04:32pm

re: #139 Targetpractice

Then we make regime change the goal. Else we sit back and accept chemical weapons as a valid weapon in future wars. Is that what we want to set as the standard going forward? Run down America until it can’t stomach another war, then break out the really bad weapons and force the most powerful military in the world to sit by and debate the morality of doing anything? If the rebels snuck a nuke into Damascus tomorrow and atomized it, would we shrug our shoulders and say that it didn’t matter how the people died, just that they’re dead and that’s war?

Okay, so what’s our plan for making sure that the government that rises afterwards is good? We haven’t really figured that one out yet anywhere else, so why do we think we can manage it here?

And a nuke would kill a lot more people. Chemical weapons are awful because of the way they kill and their indiscriminate nature, nukes are a totally different magnitude. There is no comparison.

164 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:06:50pm

re: #163 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

Okay, so what’s our plan for making sure that the government that rises afterwards is good? We haven’t really figured that one out yet anywhere else, so why do we think we can manage it here?

And a nuke would kill a lot more people. Chemical weapons are awful because of the way they kill and their indiscriminate nature, nukes are a totally different magnitude. There is no comparison.

What’s our plan now? Assad wins, we’re now stuck with a guy who is even more pissed at us for funding and aiding the rebels. The rebels win, we now wait to see who rises to the top of the heap and decide whether or not we want yet another theocracy in the Middle East. We’re putting it off til tomorrow in the hopes that whatever comes out the other end will be easier to deal with.

165 blueraven  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:07:25pm

re: #151 sagehen

And you think GOLF induces sanity? Golf makes people crazy, anybody who’s ever known a golfer knows that. Just look at those ridiculous pants!!

//

(I’m with Mark Twain on this — it’s a nice walk spoiled.)

I love golf, I hate golf, it relaxes and infuriates me. The pants are a feature plus!

166 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:09:14pm

re: #11 HappyWarrior

I don’t even know if I want us to militarily intervene in Syria especially with boots on the ground but damn it. I’m sick of people like Paul who think only Christians should have human rights. If Assad was targeting Christians, people like Rand Paul, Sarah Palin, Bryan Fischer, etc would be the first ones calling for a military intervention and calling any slow movement proof that Obama’s anti-Christian but because Bashar Al-Assad primarily targets fellow Muslims, democide is okay. Fuck you. I’m ashamed that you’re my fellow Americans. You people make George W. Bush look like a proud progressive.

No, they just provide a contrast. Whatever else may true, George W. Bush is not a bigot, and Rand Paul is.

167 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:12:08pm

re: #161 EPR-radar

To be brutally realistic, the US response if Russia were to start gassing Chechen rebels en masse would be limited to a sternly worded letter and ending some trade deals.

Nothing more we could do if it was Russia. Russia simply remain far too powerful to be attacked “as an object lesson”. And this is true nowadays even without reference to Russia’s nukes, since they now have their own non-nuclear stank-off attack capability.

168 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:12:25pm

Used to be if you wanted to stay out of combat you typically joined or picked the USAF or USN. What they forgot to tell some folks that picked the Navy during the draft was that they sometimes made recruits corpsmen who saw combat. But, generally, after WWII being in the Navy was safe. This changed in 1999 with the Joint Forces Command which puts all branches available for combat and in the field.

169 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:13:46pm

Hmm, guess that was disestablished in 2010.

170 EPR-radar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:14:45pm

re: #167 Dark_Falcon

Nothing more we could do if it was Russia. Russia simply remain far too powerful to be attacked “as an object lesson”. And this is true nowadays even without reference to Russia’s nukes, since they now have their own non-nuclear stank-off attack capability.

Precisely. Might makes right remains the bedrock principle of international law.

171 sagehen  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:17:47pm

re: #168 Gus

Used to be the National Guard was where you went to serve in a non-combat way. Maybe the occasional riot control, but mostly you expected it to be about disaster assistance or search and rescue. Big shock when they got sent to the first Gulf War.

172 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:18:27pm

re: #168 Gus

Used to be if you wanted to stay out of combat you typically joined or picked the USAF or USN. What they forgot to tell some folks that picked the Navy during the draft was that they sometimes made recruits corpsmen who saw combat. But, generally, after WWII being in the Navy was safe. This changed in 1999 with the Joint Forces Command which puts all branches available for combat and in the field.

Yes, but only a few parts of the Navy and Air Force have seen much danger. Navy supply and security personnel saw their share of combat and IED attacks in Iraq (which led the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Dahlgren VA) doing a good bit of work on mine protected vehicles), and both the Navy and the Air Force’s EOD teams also saw plenty of service in Iraq.

173 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:21:45pm

re: #171 sagehen

Used to be the National Guard was where you went to serve in a non-combat way. Maybe the occasional riot control, but mostly you expected it to be about disaster assistance or search and rescue. Big shock when they got sent to the first Gulf War.

True, but it was Iraq and Afghanistan that both saw Army National Guard units used as never before, with units from just about every state being deployed. Some, like the Chinook helicopter squadron of the Wyoming ANG saw fairly high tempo action (in its case in Afghanistan).

174 Kragar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:22:31pm

re: #172 Dark_Falcon

Yes, but only a few parts of the Navy and Air Force have seen much danger. Navy supply and security personnel saw their share of combat and IED attacks in Iraq (which led the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Dahlgren VA) doing a good bit of work on mine protected vehicles), and both the Navy and the Air Force’s EOD teams also saw plenty of service in Iraq.

I believe the Air Force also fielded their own teams of forward observers to coordinate air strikes.

175 goddamnedfrank  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:23:55pm

re: #127 Gus

[Embedded content]

As I commented to one of my facebook friends who shared the upper left photograph: I really like that the guy is covering his face while wearing enough fruit salad to create a positive identification.

176 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:24:00pm

re: #174 Kragar

I believe the Air Force also fielded their own teams of forward observers to coordinate air strikes.

Correct.

177 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:24:34pm

re: #172 Dark_Falcon

Yes, but only a few parts of the Navy and Air Force have seen much danger. Navy supply and security personnel saw their share of combat and IED attacks in Iraq (which led the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Dahlgren VA) doing a good bit of work on mine protected vehicles), and both the Navy and the Air Force’s EOD teams also saw plenty of service in Iraq.

Right, which was the joint forces stuff. Was kind of odd at first seeing air force and navy in camo. out in the field doing infantry work.

178 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:28:55pm

re: #177 Gus

Right, which was the joint forces stuff. Was kind of odd at first seeing air force and navy in camo. out in the field doing infantry work.

EOD work, which proved vital in turning the tide against Al Qaeda in Iraq. Better detection and disposal of the enemies IEDs reduced US and Iraqi Army casualties greatly and demonstrated our ability to gain the edge over our foes.

179 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:29:00pm

2008 Iraq deaths:

Percentages by service branch:

Army: 72 percent; Marines: 24 percent; Navy: 2 percent; Air Force: 1 percent

180 Justanotherhuman  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:32:32pm

At your peril…

Syria dismisses Obama as confused, moves troops

bigstory.ap.org

Expect some more civilian casualties before Congress convenes.

181 Justanotherhuman  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:34:12pm

re: #168 Gus

Used to be if you wanted to stay out of combat you typically joined or picked the USAF or USN. What they forgot to tell some folks that picked the Navy during the draft was that they sometimes made recruits corpsmen who saw combat. But, generally, after WWII being in the Navy was safe. This changed in 1999 with the Joint Forces Command which puts all branches available for combat and in the field.

Exclusive: USS Nimitz carrier group rerouted for possible help with Syria

reuters.com

182 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:34:53pm

re: #180 Justanotherhuman

At your peril…

Syria dismisses Obama as confused, moves troops

bigstory.ap.org

Expect some more civilian casualties before Congress convenes.

He’s emboldened. Why hold back when the most powerful nation in the world says it would be more trouble to stop you than to let you go on killing?

183 goddamnedfrank  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:35:38pm

I also love that this new meme of anonymous servicemen on Facebook saying no to involvement in Syria only occurred after Obama acquiesced to calls that he seek Congressional approval.

The whole thing reeks of astroturf.

184 Lidane  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:37:14pm

And right on cue, the Bush/GOP voting, evangelical Christian types on my FB list are declaring their opposition to Obama’s “imperial presidency” and to any war in Syria.

These same people supported Bush until the GOP disowned him in 2008, supported the Iraq war, and voted for McCain and voted for Romney. Remind me again what the key difference is here?

185 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:37:35pm

re: #127 Gus

[Embedded content]

That shit really pisses me off. There’s no draft, so anyone currently serving signed up voluntarily. I’ll repeat what I said earlier this weekend when I saw that on Twitter:

As members of the Armed Forces their job is to do WTF their Commander in Chief orders them to do (as along as it’s legal), not second guess him. If they refuse to follow orders, then they should be punished according to the rules of the UCMJ.

186 Justanotherhuman  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:38:25pm

re: #182 Targetpractice

He’s emboldened. Why hold back when the most powerful nation in the world says it would be more trouble to stop you than to let you go on killing?

We know what happens when hubris rears its head.

187 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:38:41pm

re: #164 Targetpractice

What’s our plan now? Assad wins, we’re now stuck with a guy who is even more pissed at us for funding and aiding the rebels. The rebels win, we now wait to see who rises to the top of the heap and decide whether or not we want yet another theocracy in the Middle East. We’re putting it off til tomorrow in the hopes that whatever comes out the other end will be easier to deal with.

Yes. We don’t really have a plan. All options are fucked. I have no idea how anyone figures out what to do in a situation like this. I think that’s why stuff like chemical weapon usage is a ‘red line’, it’s unambiguous. But it doesn’t make the regime change any easier, or the aftermath any better.

188 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:39:26pm

re: #180 Justanotherhuman

At your peril…

Syria dismisses Obama as confused, moves troops

bigstory.ap.org

Expect some more civilian casualties before Congress convenes.

Sounds just like what Saddam Hussein and Hamas did: Yelling “We’re not afraid of you” while hiding behind women and children. I call such actions cowardice.

189 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:41:19pm

re: #186 Justanotherhuman

We know what happens when hubris rears its head.

Nemesis soon follows in train, bringing disaster to those who have offended her.

190 Justanotherhuman  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:41:50pm

re: #183 goddamnedfrank

I also love that this new meme of anonymous servicemen on Facebook saying no to involvement in Syria only occurred after Obama acquiesced to calls that he seek Congressional approval.

The whole thing reeks of astroturf.

Anonymous cowards…probably fake “servicemen”.

Let me post a photo of my uncle…he’ll never know.

191 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:42:13pm

re: #185 CuriousLurker

That shit really pisses me off. There’s no draft—so anyone currently serving signed up voluntarily. I’ll repeat what I said earlier this weekend when I saw that on Twitter:

As members of the Armed Forces their job is to do WTF their Commander in Chief orders them to do (as along as it’s legal), not second guess him. If they refuse to follow orders, then they should be punished according to the rules of the UCMJ.

Also: “I didn’t become an EMT to help THOSE people and drive into THAT neighborhood.” //

192 Political Atheist  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:42:19pm

re: #185 CuriousLurker

The whole idea that hitting Assad for using chem weapons is fighting for Al Qaeda just because they joined the revolution just gives me the creeps. I don’t want that guy in charge of any troops. Military postal or payroll can always use another clerk. What if some of those guys make the target list? Two birds… Big retraction? Pffft.

193 sagehen  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:43:05pm

re: #182 Targetpractice

He’s emboldened. Why hold back when the most powerful nation in the world says it would be more trouble to stop you than to let you go on killing?

More of that 11th-dimensional chess — Obama baited Assad into doing something that will force the congressional GOP’s hand.

194 goddamnedfrank  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:43:13pm

re: #187 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

Yes. We don’t really have a plan. All options are fucked. I have no idea how anyone figures out what to do in a situation like this. I think that’s why stuff like chemical weapon usage is a ‘red line’, it’s unambiguous. But it doesn’t make the regime change any easier, or the aftermath any better.

I could solve all the world’s problems if I had a teleportation device and a giant prison on the Moon.

195 Gus  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:43:46pm
196 goddamnedfrank  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:44:52pm

re: #194 goddamnedfrank

I could solve all the world’s problems if I had a teleportation device and a giant prison on the Moon.

Also, telepathy.

197 Kragar  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:45:02pm

re: #185 CuriousLurker

That shit really pisses me off. There’s no draft—so anyone currently serving signed up voluntarily. I’ll repeat what I said earlier this weekend when I saw that on Twitter:

As members of the Armed Forces their job is to do WTF their Commander in Chief orders them to do (as along as it’s legal), not second guess him. If they refuse to follow orders, then they should be punished according to the rules of the UCMJ.

Standard enlistment is 4 years, so anyone of low rank had to have joined since Obama became president. Based on promotion rates, anyone in the middle ranks, say E-5 thru E-7 ish would have joined during Bush.

198 sagehen  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:45:27pm

re: #193 sagehen

More of that 11th-dimensional chess — Obama baited Assad into doing something that will force the congressional GOP’s hand.

And the military will be sitting ready while the debate goes on; five minutes after the vote… BOOM!

199 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:46:22pm

re: #187 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

Yes. We don’t really have a plan. All options are fucked. I have no idea how anyone figures out what to do in a situation like this. I think that’s why stuff like chemical weapon usage is a ‘red line’, it’s unambiguous. But it doesn’t make the regime change any easier, or the aftermath any better.

Choosing not to decide is still making a choice. And we will be damned for making it just as surely as we’d be damned for engaging in regime change. Do people today forgive Clinton for not acting in Rwanda because we didn’t want a repeat of Somalia?

200 ericblair  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:47:32pm

re: #169 Gus

Hmm, guess that was disestablished in 2010.

I don’t think doctrine has changed much. JFCOM was stood down to save money since it overlapped a lot with the Joint Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). Can’t say I blame them, since it was pretty confusing at this time why some things were done by JFCOM, some by JS, and some by OSD, and so most of JFCOM functions got folded into the JS.

201 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:50:32pm

BBL

202 uncah91  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:50:42pm

Is it possible that the interest is more strategic than moral?

I.E. make sure Assad keeps full control of all his chemical weapons stores.

203 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:53:56pm

re: #199 Targetpractice

Choosing not to decide is still making a choice. And we will be damned for making it just as surely as we’d be damned for engaging in regime change. Do people today forgive Clinton for not acting in Rwanda because we didn’t want a repeat of Somalia?

Sure. I’m not really concerned about who will or will not damn or forgive us, except to the extent that it matters in terms of political stability in the world.

I wish I had confidence we have a good plan. I just don’t. I don’t think we’ve ever been successful in regime change in the Middle East.

204 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 4:55:21pm

re: #203 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

Sure. I’m not really concerned about who will or will not damn or forgive us, except to the extent that it matters in terms of political stability in the world.

I wish I had confidence we have a good plan. I just don’t. I don’t think we’ve ever been successful in regime change in the Middle East.

Regime change is in the cards. Whether we have a say in who it’s changed to is what’s being decided.

205 CuriousLurker  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:00:55pm

re: #183 goddamnedfrank

I also love that this new meme of anonymous servicemen on Facebook saying no to involvement in Syria only occurred after Obama acquiesced to calls that he seek Congressional approval.

The whole thing reeks of astroturf.

Yeah, the wording on 5 of the 6 signs is suspiciously similar. Reminds me of that the GOP sounds like when they’ve been issued a new talking point.

206 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:02:31pm

re: #204 Targetpractice

Regime change is in the cards. Whether we have a say in who it’s changed to is what’s being decided.

Sure. And whether that choice is worth anything in the long run, or if we have any idea of what our choice might lead to.

207 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:02:41pm

re: #204 Targetpractice

Regime change is in the cards. Whether we have a say in who it’s changed to is what’s being decided.

(back—missed a bit.)

Still of the opinion that changing the regime is primarily the Syrian people’s business. If we make it happen we infantilize them. At that, I don’t expect results we would approve of. Like the rest of the ME, it won’t get better until they want it better, and there are a lot of tiny coffins between here and there.

208 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:09:29pm

re: #207 Decatur Deb

(back—missed a bit.)

Still of the opinion that changing the regime is primarily the Syrian people’s business. If we make it happen we infantilize them. At that, I don’t expect results we would approve of. Like the rest of the ME, it won’t get better until they want it better, and there are a lot of tiny coffins between here and there.

Let’s not kid ourselves, it’s not as though this is happening in a vacuum. We’re supporting the rebels, Russia and Iran are supporting the regime, and nobody’s really supporting the people caught in the middle.

209 RealityBasedSteve  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:09:32pm

For what it’s worth, I see this as a no-win situation all around. Assad is a bad actor by any measure, but I’m not sure at all that what would come out of the rebel groups would be any better and quite possibly worse.

Add that to the fact that if Obama makes any kind of a strong decisive move then the RWNJs cry “IMPERIAL PRESIDENT”, and if he tries to build a consensus then “HE’S WEAK AND NOT A LEADER”.

I don’t think that a few flights of tomahawk missiles will actually make any real change in the end situation. Perhaps the only thing that would might be a Kosovo level intervention, but I don’t think that anybody has the stomach or will for that at this time.

I admit, I have no answers, just questions.

RBS
I’ve been to Maine, Spain and Spokane, seen 3 worlds fairs, been around the world 2 times and watched goat F### in the marketplace, but I’ve never seen any shyte like this

210 Decatur Deb  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:13:19pm

re: #208 Targetpractice

Let’s not kid ourselves, it’s not as though this is happening in a vacuum. We’re supporting the rebels, Russia and Iran are supporting the regime, and nobody’s really supporting the people caught in the middle.

Yup. Like Egypt, there is probably some small faction of educated, westernized Jeffersonians in there. They stand to get slaughtered, because that’s not what the big players want.

211 Feline Fearless Leader  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:15:14pm

re: #168 Gus

Used to be if you wanted to stay out of combat you typically joined or picked the USAF or USN. What they forgot to tell some folks that picked the Navy during the draft was that they sometimes made recruits corpsmen who saw combat. But, generally, after WWII being in the Navy was safe. This changed in 1999 with the Joint Forces Command which puts all branches available for combat and in the field.

A friend of mine who was Security Police (or whatever the USAF equivalent of the MPs) was trained at Fort Hood in training weapons use (M-16, M-60, and even M2.) He then was sent back to USAF bases where he was put to work teaching USAF recruits and enlisted in weapons so that they could be sent over to Iraq to server as convoy guards.

Around this he did a couple of Iraq tours as a liaison and being placed in Army bases to work with training Iraqi troops. They had a pretty hefty dislike of some of the National Guard troops stationed at bases. This was due to the Nat Guard opening fire on them when they were on patrol outside the wire checking out abandoned bunkers - and this despite patrol plans being published informing them that friendlies would be out there at certain times.

212 Targetpractice  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:15:33pm

re: #210 Decatur Deb

Yup. Like Egypt, there is probably some small faction of educated, westernized Jeffersonians in there. They stand to get slaughtered, because that’s not what the big players want.

Which is why this talk about regime change being the decision of the people is such high-minded bunk. The people are either doing the bidding of outside actors or are the victims of the former. It’s been that way in more than one “revolution.”

213 Bubblehead II  Sun, Sep 1, 2013 5:18:34pm

Night Lizards. I came, I saw. Nothing more.

Sleep well if you can.

214 Quicklund  Mon, Sep 2, 2013 9:28:43pm

This nonsense out of his mouth might be one of the nicest gifts sane people have had this year. His absurd statements may well have already torpedoed his Presidential run in 2016. Sure, the GOP Red Meat Brigade will like his “kill Muslims/Save Christians” schtick. But the rest of his nonsense is going to look really stupid a few weeks from now when the last scrpas of “Assad didn’t do it” are dead and buried.

Stupid doesn’t get you eliminated from the GOP primaries but being called a RINO does. And nothing looks more like a RINO than a Republican who told a DEMOCRATIC President not to go to war.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant to Kill? An investigation led by The Associated Press has found that, over a decade, more than 1,000 people died after police subdued them through physical holds, stun guns, body blows and other force not intended to be lethal. More: Why ...
Cheechako
2 hours ago
Views: 28 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...
KGxvi
6 hours ago
Views: 80 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1