You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: US Politics Thread
buzzsaw wrote:PaSnow wrote:Military force? Depends. I mean, at some point if they don't have a President or Maduro refuses to leave & takes to violence to stay in office, then yeah we need to step in. Just a quick whoop-ass though, Desert Storm/1991/3 days style.
I understand not having the stomach for a drawn out conflict, but I dont get why we dont have the stomach for this and do things half-assed instead. We have the ability to just go in, do what needs to be done and get out before it becomes a big mess, but we don't want to do it. We twiddle our thumbs until it becomes a big mess, then we get involved. Its totally backwards.
I don’t think a quick in and out is possible. In Desert Storm, we didn’t invade Iraq and we didn’t remove Saddam. We just removed his military from Kuwait and pushed them back. We weren’t occupiers and didn’t destabilize the nation.
Venezuela is a total shit hole. Starvation and lack of medicine is it’s current state, with a leader with total control. Sure we could destroy their military and the small Russian contingent present in 72 hours with total war. But I don’t think total war is an option.
And when we remove Maduro or he flees, then what? If we leave, we just created another Iraq. Sure, there will be a lot less jihadists in Venezuela, but we’ll just get a different ideology connected to communism that all extremist groups in Central America derive from. Communists guerillas in the likeness of Che isn’t any better or different than jihadis. They use the same tactics and kill the same minorities.
We topple Maduro, 2 million migrants head towards greener pastures. We already have over 100k illegals entering our country a month and our immigration system is effectively broken. I don’t want to encourage any activity that will result in millions more of hungry mouths unable to work or communicate, entering our nation.
It isn't possible now because we twiddled our thumbs too long. We could have nipped it in the bud, but didn't. Now here we are...
Re: US Politics Thread
Randall Flagg wrote:buzzsaw wrote:I understand not having the stomach for a drawn out conflict, but I dont get why we dont have the stomach for this and do things half-assed instead. We have the ability to just go in, do what needs to be done and get out before it becomes a big mess, but we don't want to do it. We twiddle our thumbs until it becomes a big mess, then we get involved. Its totally backwards.
I don’t think a quick in and out is possible. In Desert Storm, we didn’t invade Iraq and we didn’t remove Saddam. We just removed his military from Kuwait and pushed them back. We weren’t occupiers and didn’t destabilize the nation.
Venezuela is a total shit hole. Starvation and lack of medicine is it’s current state, with a leader with total control. Sure we could destroy their military and the small Russian contingent present in 72 hours with total war. But I don’t think total war is an option.
And when we remove Maduro or he flees, then what? If we leave, we just created another Iraq. Sure, there will be a lot less jihadists in Venezuela, but we’ll just get a different ideology connected to communism that all extremist groups in Central America derive from. Communists guerillas in the likeness of Che isn’t any better or different than jihadis. They use the same tactics and kill the same minorities.
We topple Maduro, 2 million migrants head towards greener pastures. We already have over 100k illegals entering our country a month and our immigration system is effectively broken. I don’t want to encourage any activity that will result in millions more of hungry mouths unable to work or communicate, entering our nation.
It isn't possible now because we twiddled our thumbs too long. We could have nipped it in the bud, but didn't. Now here we are...
I personally think we should have standing armies on all 7 continents and instead of funding our own schools and hospitals, we should just police the world forever.
Re: US Politics Thread
I understand not having the stomach for a drawn out conflict, but I dont get why we dont have the stomach for this and do things half-assed instead. We have the ability to just go in, do what needs to be done and get out before it becomes a big mess, but we don't want to do it. We twiddle our thumbs until it becomes a big mess, then we get involved. Its totally backwards.
Honestly, in some ways, having 3 or 4 deaths can be seen as bad as having 4000. Black Hawk Down & Benghazi, not trying to make it a Dem v Rep issue, there were others. I think Reagan had Beirut & Grenada, I was younger then so don't know all the details & if each of those was a similar issue, but hopefully you get my point.
If Trump choses to invade Venezuela in any way, and a few US deaths occur, or a substantial amount of Veny citizens, it'll also impact his re-election, not saying end his chances, but likely it'll become an issue. Albeit I don't see how Liz Warren, Cory Booker, Peter Butleig etc are masters of international diplomacy & foreign conflict, so its a tit for tat thing. Trump best bet (purely politically), is to wait until public opinion changes to that of which we MUST go in. I kinda wonder if thats what HW was doing all along with Desert Shield (for about 9 months we were in Kuwait just kinda standing our ground, then around Feb 91 we went on a 3 day attack)
Re: US Politics Thread
1. Sure we could destroy their military and the small Russian contingent present in 72 hours with total war. But I don’t think total war is an option.
2. And when we remove Maduro or he flees, then what? If we leave, we just created another Iraq. Sure, there will be a lot less jihadists in Venezuela, but we’ll just get a different ideology connected to communism that all extremist groups in Central America derive from. Communists guerillas in the likeness of Che isn’t any better or different than jihadis. They use the same tactics and kill the same minorities.
1. Yeah, that too. If it escalates it could lead to near all out war as Russia wouldn't want to tolereate the US being in a Venezuelan war for a long time.
2. Good point about, maybe not jihadists per se, but rebels & revolutionaries hating America for the invasion, as that would definitely lead to attacks from within the US (via migrating up here). We do have to be careful, but do the right thing as well. Touchy.
Wasn't Panama in the 80s sorta similar? I thought we removed Noriega yet assisted Panama in stabilizing. (Having a canal crucial to our economy probably helps, lol)
Re: US Politics Thread
I’m opposed to all of it...I’m so tired of my precious tax dollars being spent on this crap.
When someone finally did something about health care, people bitched about the expense not no one ever cares about all the money we spend on this endless policing of the world.
I don’t care about Venezuela....i don’t care about Iraq. Tariffs are not the way save/make money. Ending all of these BS conflicts that accomplish nothing will save a ton.
Re: US Politics Thread
I’m opposed to all of it...I’m so tired of my precious tax dollars being spent on this crap.
I mean, I haven't followed it all that closely but I believe the country voted for their new President yet the old one is refusing to leave & is staying in power. That's a humanitarian crisis, and one the US typical keeps an eye on.
We shouldn't just tell them "Rats, that sucks folks. Good luck!". We DO care about other countries after all, and human life, rights & freedoms. Somalia, Kuwait, Ethiopia during their starvation crisis.
Maybe just as little as funding and assisting their police & military, but something.
Re: US Politics Thread
Axl S wrote:buzzsaw wrote:Nope, but most of them are smart enough to keep it once they have it. Like usual you're not understanding the point, but that's the norm for you.
This is the shit I was referring to earlier. You’re all at each other’s throats with snippy and snide comments that frankly there’s no need for.
If you all refrained a bit and dialled it back a few notches from 11 I reckon the conversation would be a lot better.
... also no Trump supporter/apologiser has explained why he isn’t compromised despite clear evidence that he is. Once again if he thinks tapes exist, regardless of whether they exist or not, surely that makes him “blackmailable” and therefore compromises?
Are you for real? Mitch does nothing but insult people and shit post. You can’t find a single intelligent and factually accurate post from him. He openly celebrates being a “fuck Trump” poster. He adds nothing to the discussion and can’t even enact basic reading comprehension.
I’ll attack anyone’s intelligence or ideas all day long when they give reason to. But I don’t attack people personally. Jason and Mitch repeatedly attack my military service, and PaSnow joins them to attack my weight (something they have no basis on) and calling me a virgin.
Jason and PaSnow spent years spreading the collusion conspiracy and called Trump and anyone who didn’t share their fetish as traitors. Did you read Mueller’s report? When the special counsel says no American colluded with Russia, not a single one, you don’t get to keep pushing your conspiracy theory.
There aren’t any tapes. The IM PaSnow shared made no mention of piss tapes, you have no evidence of piss tapes. And the idea of a piss tape is so fucking absurd, you need extraordinary evidence to even warrant consideration of the possibility.
You have 3 posters that are spreading bonafide conspiracy theories. If the Special Counsel whom they claimed was under attack for 2 years states there was no collusion, there was no collusion. You don’t get to keep claiming collusion and ignore reality. Jason is a bonafide 9/11 truther who linked Alex Jones articles for years. PaSnow isn’t far off with his Russian truther collusion nonsense.
So yea, when people are spreading a conspiracy theory that the SC spent 2 years investigating and unequivocally denies any collusion happened, they need to stand down. Not double down and personally attack anyone who doesn’t share their conspiracy.
Those other posters attacking you are also bad. I was just suggesting everyone tone the agression down - all this stuff can be discussed and debated without it.
I don't know if the piss tape is real, nor did I suggest it is. The report doesn't say it exists. What the report does state explicitly is that the President's fixer was deliberately working to stem the flow of tapes. Whether those tapes actually exist or what they contain doesn't matter if the target of the blackmail thinks they're real.
The report reads to me as pretty damning. All it really suggests is that there is not enough evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt to push for charges of criminal conspiracy of any Americans. That's actually pretty narrow. The report also outlined severe obstruction efforts, a lack of cooperation and, the destruction of evidence by the Trump admin - it even states it's conclusions could change if more evidence came to light. It was anything but an exonneration.
Where I live we have in Scots law we have three possible verdicts for a criminal trial: Guilty, Not Guilty and Not Proven. Obviously in the US those legally don't exist but the report reads more like a Not Proven verdict than a Not Guilty. When it comes to National Security and impeachment surely the bar should be Not Guilty...
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
Jobs report is out. MORE WINNING! 263,000 jobs created. Blows away all expectations. MAGA.
