Trump Exceding Authority in Syria[W:108]

Tigerace117 · Mar 1, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Lerxst said:
It's only counter productive if you believe the U.S. should be sacrificing it's blood and tax dollars in other countries whether they want us there or not. This isn't about morals, it's about our priorities as a nation coming first. If it were about morals, we would have troops in every 3rd world country on the planet. Contrary to what half of American believes, there are a number of countries that don't want our form of government.

I think you are a bit naive when it comes to the "chicken or the egg" debate surrounding the GWoT. The mandate was to strike back at those who attacked us, that was Al Qaeda. We did that. If you understand anything at all about how Al Qaeda was organized and the resources it took to pull off 9/11 you would know that they blew their wad on that attack. Their goal was to incite an uprising throughout the Islamic world against not only the U.S., but against Muslim leaders who aligned themselves with the U.S. We are on 15+ years of war because we unnecessarily expanded the 9/11 response to include invading Iraq and turning that country into a huge humanitarian tragedy, which for the most part, attracted those non-state actors that would later form ISIL.

And I never said the Russians weren't in there to prop up Assad. Historically Russia always propped up Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, etc. Russia is in there to prevent the U.S. deposing Assad and inserting a pro-Western surrogate. This is old school Cold War chess, turned up a few hundred degrees.

Our ineptitude when it came to understanding our enemy as well as the non-combatants in Iraq and Afghanistan led to the insurgency, led to a populace ripe for recruitment, and led to anti-American sentiment. We gave a whole new generation of Islamic militants a reason for being. Which was convenient, because it also gave us fresh new content for the conflict narrative we began living by.

So? The intel pointed away from Saddam from day one. Everyone from Richard Clarke to George Tenet and in between were telling W and Cheney exactly who carried out the attack and that Iraq was not involved. Saddam was a known loud mouth. You don't kill thousands of people an spend hundreds of billions of dollars to invade a country and wreck it simple because a guy rooted for your enemy.

The GWoT is a self-fulfilling campaign. The more we bomb, the more we kill. The more we kill, the more people hate us and become ripe for recruitment. Now keep in mind, a lot of the places we are hitting, the folks there that want to see the U.S. burn, have absolutely no ability to hit the United States. Their operational capacity is limited to the region they reside. They have small arms, artillery, and various other battlefield weapons that are only effective at relatively short distances when you're talking about U.S. national security.

Using chemical weapons against civilian populations is not something which should be tolerated, period, end of discussion. I don't care if Assad is upset we are there; he lost all say in the discussion when he authorized the first attack.

Funnily enough, there are plenty of people in Syria who don't want to live under a dictatorship. Assad has been dropping bombs on their heads for years now.

AQ "blew its wad" because we actively hunted its leaders down, destroyed their sanctuaries, and killed their experienced troops. Yes, many of Saddam's secret police ended up working for ISIS, but considering that he was steadily radicalizing the country its hard to claim no such movement wouldn't have emerged anyway. And there would be jihadis coming out of the woodwork even if we had spinelessly kowtowed to every two bit dictator in the region.

Even ****ing North Korea had the common decency not to create billboards celebrating the attack, and the Norks are out and out lunatics. Celebrating an attack on the United States and murder of thousands of innocent people makes it clear you aren't just a "loudmouth"

Oh really? 9/11--- and attacks like the Pulse Shooting---would say otherwise. Leaving these groups alone only allows them to expand and grow in strength and influence.

Lerxst · Mar 1, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Tigerace117 said:
Using chemical weapons against civilian populations is not something which should be tolerated, period, end of discussion. I don't care if Assad is upset we are there; he lost all say in the discussion when he authorized the first attack.

How romantic. Because being killed is worse when its done with a nerve gas versus an AK bullet or 122mm artillery round. You are out of touch with reality. As far as Assad not liking us being there, it really makes no difference. The Russians are there now and we are powerless to change that situation.

Funnily enough, there are plenty of people in Syria who don't want to live under a dictatorship. Assad has been dropping bombs on their heads for years now.

It's not funny at all. But its their problem, not ours.

AQ "blew its wad" because we actively hunted its leaders down, destroyed their sanctuaries, and killed their experienced troops.

You apparently aren't too familiar with Al Qaeda or the planning and execution it took to pull the attack off. There are plenty of very good books out there, you should read some.

Yes, many of Saddam's secret police ended up working for ISIS, but considering that he was steadily radicalizing the country its hard to claim no such movement wouldn't have emerged anyway.

Clearly you know very little about Saddam Hussein. He was a secular Pan-Arabist, he was not "radicalizing" the country. The notion is absurd because it would be completely counter-productive to him maintaining power. It was Osama Bin Laden who offered Saudi Arabia the assistance of his jihadists to protect the Kingdom from Saddam Hussein. Again...books.

And there would be jihadis coming out of the woodwork even if we had spinelessly kowtowed to every two bit dictator in the region.

That doesn't make any sense. Do you know anything about the radical Islamist groups that were operating in the middle east and north Africa? They were attempting to overthrow those "two bit dictators" you speak of. Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Libya, etc. Those jihadists were actively trying to topple those governments.

Even ****ing North Korea had the common decency not to create billboards celebrating the attack, and the Norks are out and out lunatics. Celebrating an attack on the United States and murder of thousands of innocent people makes it clear you aren't just a "loudmouth"

Wrong, that's all it makes you. A loud mouth, a cheerleader. Your anger should be directed at the Saudi paymasters and "charities" that actually funded Al Qaeda. And news flash, we killed far more civilians in our response to 9/11 than Al Qaeda killed on 9/11, so save your indignation.

Oh really? 9/11--- and attacks like the Pulse Shooting---would say otherwise. Leaving these groups alone only allows them to expand and grow in strength and influence

We are talking right now, present day. Not 17 years ago. 9/11 took years of planning and almost $500,000. And the Pulse shooting wasn't carried out by any Islamic jihadist group, it was carried out by an emotionally disturbed lone gunman who had no previous affiliation with ISIS. So no, they don't speak otherwise. Your understanding of the issues if seriously anemic.

Like I said, do some research. I'll even help you out. Here's a good list to educate yourself from:
Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke
A Quick and Dirty Guide to War: 4th Edition by Bay and Dunnigan
Black Flags" The Rise of ISIS by Joby Warrick
Unintended Consequences by Peter Galbraith
The Longest War: American and Al Qaeda Since 9/11 by Peter Bergen

I own all of these and you would do well to check a couple out. But only if you are really interested in understanding the subject matter. There are about a half dozen more but the above are the first ones that come to mind.

Tigerace117 · Mar 1, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Lerxst said:
How romantic. Because being killed is worse when its done with a nerve gas versus an AK bullet or 122mm artillery round. You are out of touch with reality. As far as Assad not liking us being there, it really makes no difference. The Russians are there now and we are powerless to change that situation.

It's not funny at all. But its their problem, not ours.

You apparently aren't too familiar with Al Qaeda or the planning and execution it took to pull the attack off. There are plenty of very good books out there, you should read some.

Clearly you know very little about Saddam Hussein. He was a secular Pan-Arabist, he was not "radicalizing" the country. The notion is absurd because it would be completely counter-productive to him maintaining power. It was Osama Bin Laden who offered Saudi Arabia the assistance of his jihadists to protect the Kingdom from Saddam Hussein. Again...books.

That doesn't make any sense. Do you know anything about the radical Islamist groups that were operating in the middle east and north Africa? They were attempting to overthrow those "two bit dictators" you speak of. Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Libya, etc. Those jihadists were actively trying to topple those governments.

Wrong, that's all it makes you. A loud mouth, a cheerleader. Your anger should be directed at the Saudi paymasters and "charities" that actually funded Al Qaeda. And news flash, we killed far more civilians in our response to 9/11 than Al Qaeda killed on 9/11, so save your indignation.

We are talking right now, present day. Not 17 years ago. 9/11 took years of planning and almost $500,000. And the Pulse shooting wasn't carried out by any Islamic jihadist group, it was carried out by an emotionally disturbed lone gunman who had no previous affiliation with ISIS. So no, they don't speak otherwise. Your understanding of the issues if seriously anemic.

Like I said, do some research. I'll even help you out. Here's a good list to educate yourself from:
Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke
A Quick and Dirty Guide to War: 4th Edition by Bay and Dunnigan
Black Flags" The Rise of ISIS by Joby Warrick
Unintended Consequences by Peter Galbraith
The Longest War: American and Al Qaeda Since 9/11 by Peter Bergen

I own all of these and you would do well to check a couple out. But only if you are really interested in understanding the subject matter. There are about a half dozen more but the above are the first ones that come to mind.

Yes, I would certainly rather be vaporized by an artillery shell or even shot versus dying a slow, agonizing death from chemical weapons. There's a reason why even Adolf Hitler largely refrained from using chemical weapons on the battlefield; although he did use them to murder millions of his own people. Interestingly enough, the Russians went toe to to with us not that long ago. How did that go for them again?

It stopped being "just their problem" when the gas came out.

It's hard to plan or execute an attack when you are dead, your best followers are dead, and you don't have an entire country to run around and prepare in.

What a joke. Saddam had been encouraging religious fanaticism for years; you saw it in the Fedayeen Saddam and in the thousands of jihadis who flocked to Iraq. They didn't do that in the name of "secular Pan Arabic feeling"; they did it for a racial religious ideology.

Oh really? Having an army which would rather die than surrender is "counterproductive" to maintaining power? History says otherwise.

Yeah....I hate to burst your bubble, but there were almost fifteen years between the Gulf War and Iraqi Freedom.

Actually, the Libyans and Syrians had both been arming and training terrorist groups for decades.

What a crock of ****. "Don't be mad at AQ, they "only" killed thousands of innocent people. After all, lots of people have died during the fight against AQ".

Total bull****.

I actually own multiple editions of a Quick and Dirty Guide to War. Neither author agrees with your fantasies.

Lerxst · Mar 1, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Tigerace117 said:
Yes, I would certainly rather be vaporized by an artillery shell or even shot versus dying a slow, agonizing death from chemical weapons. There's a reason why even Adolf Hitler largely refrained from using chemical weapons on the battlefield; although he did use them to murder millions of his own people. Interestingly enough, the Russians went toe to to with us not that long ago. How did that go for them again?

So shooting them in the head is okay, but gassing them is where you draw the line, huh?

It stopped being "just their problem" when the gas came out

/yawn

It's hard to plan or execute an attack when you are dead, your best followers are dead, and you don't have an entire country to run around and prepare in.

What a joke. Saddam had been encouraging religious fanaticism for years; you saw it in the Fedayeen Saddam and in the thousands of jihadis who flocked to Iraq. They didn't do that in the name of "secular Pan Arabic feeling"; they did it for a racial religious ideology.

You are truly clueless. SADDAM was secular Pan-Arabist, which is one reason he despised the Iranians, because they are Persians. There is a distinct difference between the Iraqi insurgents, who were born out of the Saddam's military, and the jihadists that came in from other countries. You would know this if you would actually studied up on the subject.

Oh really? Having an army which would rather die than surrender is "counterproductive" to maintaining power? History says otherwise.

Again, you don't know what you are talking about.

Yeah....I hate to burst your bubble, but there were almost fifteen years between the Gulf War and Iraqi Freedom.

We're talking about present day. What point are you making?

Actually, the Libyans and Syrians had both been arming and training terrorist groups for decades.

No ****. Who said otherwise? We're talking about present day.

What a crock of ****. "Don't be mad at AQ, they "only" killed thousands of innocent people. After all, lots of people have died during the fight against AQ".

Did you just have a Touretts outburst or something? What are you implying?

Total bull****.

No, you're just ignorant. You can be taught though, if you have any interest.

I actually own multiple editions of a Quick and Dirty Guide to War. Neither author agrees with your fantasies.

Well unless you own the latest edition, which I do, you're full of ****. The book is full of updated sections, so go get the 4th edition and get caught up. Or quit making **** up.

Harshaw · Mar 1, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Dittohead not! said:
The War Powers Agreement was passed in 1973, 19 years after the US first became involved in Vietnam and about 8 years before Lyndon Johnson ramped up involvement to half a million soldiers. It was passed to limit the power of the President to unilaterally declare war. Unfortunately, both Congress and the President forgot all about limiting the power of the President to what is outlined in the Constitution when Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Cheney decided to follow the philosophy of the Project for a New American Century and invade Iraq, and managed to talk Bush and the Congress (most of them anyway) into the idea.

Whether or not they were following your PNAC conspiracy theory, they still got permission from Congress, thus following the War Powers Act. When listing Presidents ignoring the War Powers Act, it is thus not "partisan" to mention Obama in Libya and not Iraq, because Obama ignored the War Powers Act, and Bush did not.

Risky Thicket · Mar 1, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Harshaw said:
Whether or not they were following your PNAC conspiracy theory, they still got permission from Congress, thus following the War Powers Act. When listing Presidents ignoring the War Powers Act, it is thus not "partisan" to mention Obama in Libya and not Iraq, because Obama ignored the War Powers Act, and Bush did not.

Yes, but per the Constitution only Congress has the power to declare war. There are many good reasons for that.

That being said Trump can do anything he wants. The GOP will do nothing to rein Trump in. That’s a fact. So in essence it really no longer matters what the Constitution or the law may or may not say.

DaveFagan · Mar 1, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Evilroddy said:
jonny5:

The US Congress is an equal copartner in ignoring the US Constitution in matters of declaring war since the late 1970's and is just as responsible for the rise of a militarised state and an imperial presidency as the executive branch is. To both branches war has become an extension of business by other means (to borrow from Carl Von Clausewitz) and the Congressional-Military-Surveillance-Industrial-Complex is quite happy to ignore the required legal niceties of declaration of war or proper and closely defined authorisation for military force in pursuit of both "happiness" for the few and hegemony over the many.

Welcome to the forever-war, where everyone is a legitimate target including US citizens who become too inconvenient. A revolution (not necessarily a violent one, however) of the people is the only thing which will correct this top-down abuse of the US Constitution, but such a revolution would be too inconvenient in the extreme. Thus the ongoing and parallel militarisation of US police forces, other law enforcement agencies and the proliferation of privately owned mercenary and surveillance companies, all operating on American territory, into what are becoming a network of paramilitary gendarmeries in support of the oligarchy's established hierarchy. Unfettered militarism and power does not like to be limited nor challenged and prefers authoritarian hierarchy to direct democracy or an unchecked representative democracy in revolt against authoritarianism. Control and the pursuit of their happiness is foremost in the oligarchs' minds, not your liberty nor your equality. The next two to three decades of US history could become very dark indeed.

Cheers?
Evilroddy.

Since revolutions kill people, all one can really do is communicate the truth and hope to achieve peaceful results. It's sure as hell an uphill struggle. The Goebbels machinery is extremely effective. I don't recall who said it, but it is paraphrased, "I won't be happy until everything they believe is a lie." Does it feel close to home?
/

Harshaw · Mar 1, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Risky Thicket said:
Yes, but per the Constitution only Congress has the power to declare war. There are many good reasons for that.

That being said Trump can do anything he wants. The GOP will do nothing to rein Trump in. That’s a fact. So in essence it really no longer matters what the Constitution or the law may or may not say.

None of that has anything to do with the actual point.

Thoreau72 · Mar 2, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Dittohead not! said:
So, if it's someone else using poison gas to kill civilians, we're still left with the barrel bombs. That the government of Syria is killing its own people is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

But, the USA is not the judge nor the jury, and should not try to play executioner.

I have many reasonable doubts that Assad used barrel bombs or gas on his own people, and the main doubt about that stems from the huge propaganda efforts by the US, Israel, Saudi and the other players.

That the US audience is expertly misinformed is another huge doubt.

From the military perspective, neither you nor anybody else has made the case that Assad would gain any advantage by doing so. With Russian help, his forces are fairly well in control. He would gain no advantage, but he would draw the ire of the world if he were to do that. Why would he want to do that? You cannot answer, and nobody else can either. Like my dear sister, you merely repeat the propaganda talking points.

Another military angle on it is why in hell would one employ these "barrel bombs" out of helicopters when one has fairly modern gunships and attack aircraft? Why?

Dittohead not! · Mar 2, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Thoreau72 said:
I have many reasonable doubts that Assad used barrel bombs or gas on his own people, and the main doubt about that stems from the huge propaganda efforts by the US, Israel, Saudi and the other players.

That the US audience is expertly misinformed is another huge doubt.

From the military perspective, neither you nor anybody else has made the case that Assad would gain any advantage by doing so. With Russian help, his forces are fairly well in control. He would gain no advantage, but he would draw the ire of the world if he were to do that. Why would he want to do that? You cannot answer, and nobody else can either. Like my dear sister, you merely repeat the propaganda talking points.
when one has fairly modern gunships and attack aircraft? Why?

I'm not sure just who you think the conspirators are who are expertly misinforming the American public, or what their motive might be for doing so.

As for why barrel bombs instead of Russian jets, you'd have to ask Assad that question. I'd guess maybe Russians have control over those aircraft, but that's just a guess.

Thoreau72 · Mar 2, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Dittohead not! said:
I'm not sure just who you think the conspirators are who are expertly misinforming the American public, or what their motive might be for doing so.

As for why barrel bombs instead of Russian jets, you'd have to ask Assad that question. I'd guess maybe Russians have control over those aircraft, but that's just a guess.

I don't have to ask Assad anything, but the parties making the claims must prove their claims. I'm skeptical of the statements of known liars. Some are not, but I am.

Considering that Edward Bernays was hired by Woodrow Wilson more than a century ago, I can only speculate as to names. Considering the existence of Operation Mockingbird, and what Jesse Ventura had to say about his time in office vis-à-vis CIA influence behind the scenes, I'm comfortable with my skepticism of mainstream media propaganda.

Here's a wee bit of insight into how some in government think: From William Casey, formerly of the CIA: when everything the American people believe is false, we will know the success of our misinformation programs.

Even from my short time in the US Army indoctrination programs, I remember that deception and misinformation are two tools the military uses. I hope that is not too difficult to grasp.

A permanent state of war is the goal of what Ike called the MIC. Greater Israel is the goal of you-know-who, and that includes the elimination of Syria as any sort of neighbor with the wrong religion.

Dittohead not! · Mar 2, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Thoreau72 said:
I don't have to ask Assad anything, but the parties making the claims must prove their claims. I'm skeptical of the statements of known liars. Some are not, but I am.

Considering that Edward Bernays was hired by Woodrow Wilson more than a century ago, I can only speculate as to names. Considering the existence of Operation Mockingbird, and what Jesse Ventura had to say about his time in office vis-à-vis CIA influence behind the scenes, I'm comfortable with my skepticism of mainstream media propaganda.

Here's a wee bit of insight into how some in government think: From William Casey, formerly of the CIA: when everything the American people believe is false, we will know the success of our misinformation programs.

Even from my short time in the US Army indoctrination programs, I remember that deception and misinformation are two tools the military uses. I hope that is not too difficult to grasp.

A permanent state of war is the goal of what Ike called the MIC. Greater Israel is the goal of you-know-who, and that includes the elimination of Syria as any sort of neighbor with the wrong religion.

Interesting quote. It appears to be real, which is unusual of quotes posted on this board.

Here's the source:

As he did to all the other secretaries of their departments and agencies, Reagan asked what he saw as his goal as director for the CIA, to which
he replied with this quote, which I recorded in my notes of the meeting
as he said it. Shortly thereafter I told Senior White House correspondent Sarah McClendon, who was a close friend and colleague, who in turn made it public.

but, that was not his goal as minister of (mis)information, or one controlling the press, but his goal for the CIA.

No one is running the media. We still have a free press in this country despite attempts by the current administration to do away with it.

Thoreau72 · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Dittohead not! said:
Interesting quote. It appears to be real, which is unusual of quotes posted on this board.

Here's the source:

but, that was not his goal as minister of (mis)information, or one controlling the press, but his goal for the CIA.

No one is running the media. We still have a free press in this country despite attempts by the current administration to do away with it.

Sure we have a "free press" in this country my friend. Whatever you need to think is certainly your prerogative.

Udo Ulfkotte, now deceased, was a German reporter who detailed the CIA influence in the European press in his book "Journalists for Hire, How the CIA buys the news". He was a young man, was interviewed several times on TV, and is now deceased, very much like the young US journalist working on a sensitive military subject for Rolling Stone who was killed in a freak accident in his new Mercedes. I think his name was Hastings.

Whistleblowers too close to the truth are dealt with appropriately. Those 2 fellows are in the same category as Gary Webb with his 2 shots to the head suicide. Yes of course, our media is utterly independent. That's what prompted Scott Pelley to tell the lady who witnessed the lead up to the shooting in San Bernardino 2 years ago that she could not possibly be correct in reporting that she saw 3 athletic men in military garb doing the shooting, because "the authorities have told us it was a man and his wife."

Stick with the MSM Dittohead--it will never deceive you. :lol:

Dittohead not! · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Thoreau72 said:
Sure we have a "free press" in this country my friend. Whatever you need to think is certainly your prerogative.

Udo Ulfkotte, now deceased, was a German reporter who detailed the CIA influence in the European press in his book "Journalists for Hire, How the CIA buys the news". He was a young man, was interviewed several times on TV, and is now deceased, very much like the young US journalist working on a sensitive military subject for Rolling Stone who was killed in a freak accident in his new Mercedes. I think his name was Hastings.

Whistleblowers too close to the truth are dealt with appropriately. Those 2 fellows are in the same category as Gary Webb with his 2 shots to the head suicide. Yes of course, our media is utterly independent. That's what prompted Scott Pelley to tell the lady who witnessed the lead up to the shooting in San Bernardino 2 years ago that she could not possibly be correct in reporting that she saw 3 athletic men in military garb doing the shooting, because "the authorities have told us it was a man and his wife."

Stick with the MSM Dittohead--it will never deceive you. :lol:

Shadowy figures in "military garb", CIA "buying" the news, sure. Do you buy into the "Twin Towers attack was an inside job" idea? How about the "We didn't really land on the moon" one? There are so many WCT out there, it is sometimes hard to keep track.

Tigerace117 · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Lerxst said:
So shooting them in the head is okay, but gassing them is where you draw the line, huh?

/yawn

You are truly clueless. SADDAM was secular Pan-Arabist, which is one reason he despised the Iranians, because they are Persians. There is a distinct difference between the Iraqi insurgents, who were born out of the Saddam's military, and the jihadists that came in from other countries. You would know this if you would actually studied up on the subject.

Again, you don't know what you are talking about.

We're talking about present day. What point are you making?

No ****. Who said otherwise? We're talking about present day.

Did you just have a Touretts outburst or something? What are you implying?

No, you're just ignorant. You can be taught though, if you have any interest.

Well unless you own the latest edition, which I do, you're full of ****. The book is full of updated sections, so go get the 4th edition and get caught up. Or quit making **** up.

Gee, shooting them is bad, but gassing innocent civilians is over just about every line in the book. I'm not surprised you don't get that.

Does the murder of innocent people bore you? Looks like it.

Saddam despised the "Persians" because they had lands that he wanted. That's it. It had nothing to do with the fact that he was steadily radicalizing the country, nor the fact that his secret police play key role in the ISIS command structure.

Actually, Saddam counted on those foreign jihadis quite a bit. That's why he made the deal with the Syrians to keep the ratlines open.

Oh really? Once again, history says otherwise.

That OBL's opinion years before had changed by Iraqi Freedom; he saw support from Saddam, he saw a perfect chance to kill Americans, and he took it.

You claimed that the jihadis being armed and trained by countries like Syria and Libya 'hated them". That's your statement, and it's pretty clearly not true.

Newsflash---your whining that "oh, we killed x number of people years after 9/11" is not relevant to the fact that AQ and its ilk attacked the US and thus needed to be hunted down--- and indeed were.

No, still total bull****.

Yep, it is, and nowhere does it make any excuses for various authoritarian regimes gassing people like you do.

DaveFagan · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Dittohead not! said:
I'm not sure just who you think the conspirators are who are expertly misinforming the American public, or what their motive might be for doing so.

As for why barrel bombs instead of Russian jets, you'd have to ask Assad that question. I'd guess maybe Russians have control over those aircraft, but that's just a guess.

Find info on the CIA Operation Mockingbird and then you will know who is EXPERTLY misinforming the USA citizens.

The Church Committee from 1976-77.

The Deep State deeply needs a propaganda front because "plausible deniability" prevents revealing truth, and not for reasons of our collective National Security.
/

DaveFagan · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Tigerace117 said:
Gee, shooting them is bad, but gassing innocent civilians is over just about every line in the book. I'm not surprised you don't get that.

Does the murder of innocent people bore you? Looks like it.

Saddam despised the "Persians" because they had lands that he wanted. That's it. It had nothing to do with the fact that he was steadily radicalizing the country, nor the fact that his secret police play key role in the ISIS command structure.

Actually, Saddam counted on those foreign jihadis quite a bit. That's why he made the deal with the Syrians to keep the ratlines open.

Oh really? Once again, history says otherwise.

That OBL's opinion years before had changed by Iraqi Freedom; he saw support from Saddam, he saw a perfect chance to kill Americans, and he took it.

You claimed that the jihadis being armed and trained by countries like Syria and Libya 'hated them". That's your statement, and it's pretty clearly not true.

Newsflash---your whining that "oh, we killed x number of people years after 9/11" is not relevant to the fact that AQ and its ilk attacked the US and thus needed to be hunted down--- and indeed were.

No, still total bull****.

Yep, it is, and nowhere does it make any excuses for various authoritarian regimes gassing people like you do.

McMaster recently stated that the Military has no evidence of Syrian gov't use of gas.

The evidence that has been presented in the USA is selected newspaper articles by prejudiced sources.

End of story.
/

Dittohead not! · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

DaveFagan said:
Find info on the CIA Operation Mockingbird and then you will know who is EXPERTLY misinforming the USA citizens.

The Church Committee from 1976-77.

The Deep State deeply needs a propaganda front because "plausible deniability" prevents revealing truth, and not for reasons of our collective National Security.
/

Careful. You'll get this thread moved to the conspiracy theories section.

Oozlefinch · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Captain Adverse said:
Still, I would REALLY like American troops out of all the States in the Middle East, starting with Afghanistan, through Iraq, and Syria.

Afghanistan is not in the Middle East.

Oozlefinch · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Tigerace117 said:
Saddam despised the "Persians" because they had lands that he wanted. That's it. It had nothing to do with the fact that he was steadily radicalizing the country, nor the fact that his secret police play key role in the ISIS command structure.

He also thought they would be a pushover. The government had just fallen in a revolution, much of the military leadership had been executed or imprisoned, and the country was involved in a protracted near-war with the United States.

In 1980, Iran was a real mess, and he thought he could exploit that. Instead he got a decade long stalemate.

As for being a "Pan-Arabist" as somebody claimed, how can anybody explain Kuwait then? They certainly were not Persian, and they were indeed Arabs. So that kind of defeats that entire claim.

DaveFagan · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Dittohead not! said:
Careful. You'll get this thread moved to the conspiracy theories section.

No CT.

Operation Mockingbird was/is a CIA propaganda operation to control the major media. Worked and is working good.

The Church Committee found over 400 CIA agents in major media in the USA. Gee, wonder what they were doing?

All you had to do was google and find your own links to the info. This stuff is documented in Congressional hearings. You just don't want to believe it.
/

Fledermaus · Mar 3, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

DaveFagan said:
No CT.

Operation Mockingbird was/is a CIA propaganda operation to control the major media. Worked and is working good.

The Church Committee found over 400 CIA agents in major media in the USA. Gee, wonder what they were doing?

All you had to do was google and find your own links to the info. This stuff is documented in Congressional hearings. You just don't want to believe it.
/

Project Mockingbird, a telephone intercept activity, was conducted between 12 March 1963 and 15 June 1963, and targeted two Washington based newsmen who, at the time, had been publishing news articles based on, and frequently quoting, classified materials of this Agency and others, including Top Secret and Special Intelligence.

CT forum is over there -------------->

(Do you believe everything you read on CT sites?)

Thoreau72 · Mar 4, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Dittohead not! said:
Shadowy figures in "military garb", CIA "buying" the news, sure. Do you buy into the "Twin Towers attack was an inside job" idea? How about the "We didn't really land on the moon" one? There are so many WCT out there, it is sometimes hard to keep track.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think we did land on the moon.

Only the most incurious amongst us still buy into the 911 story.

Not likely I'm sure, but you should consider listening to Jesse Ventura about what he learned about CIA activity while he was governor.

DaveFagan · Mar 4, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Fledermaus said:
Project Mockingbird, a telephone intercept activity, was conducted between 12 March 1963 and 15 June 1963, and targeted two Washington based newsmen who, at the time, had been publishing news articles based on, and frequently quoting, classified materials of this Agency and others, including Top Secret and Special Intelligence.

CT forum is over there -------------->

(Do you believe everything you read on CT sites?)

Believe???

Why do you think Intelligence Agency heads like Clapper, McCullogh, Brennan can lie to Congress and not be prosecuted for perjury?

And "WHY" do they lie?

You really don't understand the concept of "plausible denialability" as relates to Intelligence. You should have no problems making a good deal from that guy selling the Brooklyn Bridge.. Hell of a deal, eh?
/

Lerxst · Mar 4, 2018

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Tigerace117 said:
Gee, shooting them is bad, but gassing innocent civilians is over just about every line in the book. I'm not surprised you don't get that.

Does the murder of innocent people bore you? Looks like it.

Saddam despised the "Persians" because they had lands that he wanted. That's it. It had nothing to do with the fact that he was steadily radicalizing the country, nor the fact that his secret police play key role in the ISIS command structure.

Actually, Saddam counted on those foreign jihadis quite a bit. That's why he made the deal with the Syrians to keep the ratlines open.

Oh really? Once again, history says otherwise.

That OBL's opinion years before had changed by Iraqi Freedom; he saw support from Saddam, he saw a perfect chance to kill Americans, and he took it.

You claimed that the jihadis being armed and trained by countries like Syria and Libya 'hated them". That's your statement, and it's pretty clearly not true.

Newsflash---your whining that "oh, we killed x number of people years after 9/11" is not relevant to the fact that AQ and its ilk attacked the US and thus needed to be hunted down--- and indeed were.

No, still total bull****.

Yep, it is, and nowhere does it make any excuses for various authoritarian regimes gassing people like you do.

You are quite possibly one of the most ignorant people I have ever encountered in this sub-forum. You're not only ill-informed, you're also dishonest. I suggest you open your brain a little bit and consider doing some objective research. I know you won't, but I feel better if I encourage you to learn.

Trump Exceding Authority in Syria[W:108]

U mad bro?

U mad bro?

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot

Sewer Rat

Iconoclast

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot

master political analyst

master political analyst

master political analyst

Iconoclast

Iconoclast

master political analyst

Iconoclast

Iconoclast

U mad bro?