dagblog - Comments for "We created catastrophe in Iraq and Syria. Canada takes 30,000 of our victims. Greece sinks, the EU crumbles, we posture. God sees."

Its not whether you or I

jollyroger — Thu, 10 Mar 2016 01:24:48 +0000

Its not whether you or I agree as to the standards for legally launching a war in the absence of a security council resolution (which, after all, is what we are deconstructing here...), it is the utility to be extracted for a people hoping to navigate nation- state relations with a claim to legitimacy.

Would you agree that the absence of legitimacy is likely to render the projection of power self defeating in the long run?

Well, I finally read the

Lurker — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 23:31:14 +0000

In reply to Read RFK JR'S article. The

Well, I finally read the article, which was interesting indeed. He blames the CIA for everything that has gone wrong in the Middle East for the last 70 years, which is a refreshing change from blaming Israel. But it still feels like conspiracy paranoia: a small group of evil/foolish fiends are to blame, and everybody else is absolved. Too pat.

But even if it's true, or mostly true, the CIA reports to the President, and does his bidding. If they screw up, it's the President who was ultimately responsible. The CIA's reports are just one of the many inputs facing the President. He, not the CIA, has to decide what to do.

And if you think there is nothing "other than immanent self defense ( " vital interests" ) that can justify the projection of lethal force", you agree with would-be mass-murderers Maiello and Wolraich. But Presidents of both parties disagree. As do people who still have a conscience.

Love it when Lurker tries to

NCD — Mon, 07 Mar 2016 03:56:36 +0000

In reply to I think in all these cases,

Love it when Lurker tries to score partisan points over his latest count of dead in Syria. As if he cares or has skin in the game.

Read RFK JR'S article. The

jollyroger — Mon, 07 Mar 2016 03:50:27 +0000

In reply to Your riposte is instructive,

Read RFK JR'S article. The root of those problems in Syria was our pursuit of the " vital interest " of a Qatar to turkey natural gas pipeline

When come back, bring informed viewpoint.

Your riposte is instructive,

jollyroger — Mon, 07 Mar 2016 03:44:31 +0000

In reply to I think in all these cases,

Your riposte is instructive, informed as it is by the casual assumption that there is something other than immanent self defense ( " vital interests" ) that can justify the projection of lethal force.

As stated before, the Iraqis

moat — Mon, 07 Mar 2016 00:14:25 +0000

In reply to I think in all these cases,

As stated before, the Iraqis did not want the U.S. to stay any longer.

Obama was trying to get a deal for a force of 3,000 while the GOP wanted many more but it didn't matter because Iraq was more interested in the number zero.

I think in all these cases,

Lurker — Sun, 06 Mar 2016 23:25:51 +0000

In reply to Democrat. Communists were

I think in all these cases, the President concluded that vital US interests were in danger, and ordered troops in to protect them. US forces exist to protect US interests. We don't know what information the President had on which to base his decision. In all these cases the decision resulted in massive loss of lives, some of those lives American.

We can debate the counterfactuals forever: what would have happened if the US had not intervened. Would it have been worse? We'll never know.

The attempt to depict Bush's war in Iraq as somehow different from the other wars is just stupid party politics.

We can see the results of Obama's decision not to intervene: 500,000 dead in Syria, Europe falling apart, the growth of Iranian hegemony and Russian power...

Their party was AMERICAN...

jollyroger — Sun, 06 Mar 2016 19:43:30 +0000

In reply to More like Kennedy getting

Their party was AMERICAN... Do the dead of My Laii or the 500.000 children dead of sanctions or the Palestinians swimming in shit lagoons care about our faux political disputes?

Will you get pass from st peter because you voted repugnant? Will I get a pass because I voted dem?

Gimme a fuckin' break.

Drop the straw argument. It ain't about dem vs pug,its right v wrong and WE are WRONG

Democrat. Communists were

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 06 Mar 2016 10:05:25 +0000

In reply to More like Kennedy getting

Democrat. Communists were actually leading a brutal bloody insurgency into South Vietnam in violation of international agreement. Communists violated WWII armistice by sending troops into South Korea, pushing down into toehold of Pusan within 3 months, so the Allied response was to defend South Koreans.

Compare that with Iraq, where Hussein wasn't actually reconstituting his WMD programs.

Additionally, the Korean War was run very competently, despite its military complexity. The Vietnam War was run worse, but still much more complex than a policing action that was carried out haphazardly despite 6-8 months preparation for invasion.

More like Kennedy getting

Lurker — Sun, 06 Mar 2016 07:05:02 +0000

In reply to Cuz GW lying us into getting

More like Kennedy getting into the Vietnam War or Truman getting into the Korean War. Which political party were they?