• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Exceding Authority in Syria[W:108]

Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

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.
/

That's actually totally false Dave; and you know that, because I already refuted that claim the first time you made it.

You are lying yet again.

End of story.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

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.

Yep, Saddam had this real interesting habit of jumping headlong into situations and winding up in a very bad situation. He really wasn't the brightest light in the room in many ways, despite the nostalgic moaning of some westerners.

And yes, his attack on Kuwait was rather nasty.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

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.

As usual, when confronted with the fact that your opinions are unsupported when faced by related you resort to throwing tempe tantrum. Funny how whenever someone like you says "honest research" they don't mean "honest research"; they simply want one to start mindless agreeing with them.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

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.

I can explain. He was a Pan-Arabic secularist who was also a thug. He claimed that Kuwait was part of Iraq, broken away by the British after the Ottoman Empire was defeated. In actuality it was about the oil. Kuwait had it, Saddam wanted it. So in addition to the claim of Kuwait actually being part of Iraq, he claimed Kuwait was illegally taking Iraqi oil by slant drilling.

Being a Pan-Arabist doesn't mean he is above hating Persians and bullying other Arabs. The two are not mutually exclusive.
 
Last edited:
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

As usual, when confronted with the fact that your opinions are unsupported when faced by related you resort to throwing tempe tantrum. Funny how whenever someone like you says "honest research" they don't mean "honest research"; they simply want one to start mindless agreeing with them.

You presented nothing of the kind. The very fact that you lied about the book you supposedly owned multiple copies of tells me all I need to know about the depth of your knowledge on the subject.

Now quit whining and go educate yourself.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

I can explain. He was a Pan-Arabic secularist who was also a thug. He claimed that Kuwait was part of Iraq, broken away by the British after the Ottoman Empire was defeated. In actuality it was about the oil. Kuwait had it, Saddam wanted it. So in addition to the claim of Kuwait actually being part of Iraq, he claimed Kuwait was illegally taking Iraqi oil by slant drilling.

Being a Pan-Arabist doesn't mean he is above hating Persians and bullying other Arabs. The two are not mutually exclusive.

He was never a Pan-Arabic supporter.

He only supported it when it worked in his favor, and nothing else. Just like his claiming to be secularist. Unless claiming to be a devout Muslim was in his favor, then he would declare for that as well.

Sorry, but you are trying to fit a claim that does not match the facts. His "Pan-Arab" beliefs were like his religion. Something to be used to try and gain support, but not really believed.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

He was never a Pan-Arabic supporter.

He only supported it when it worked in his favor, and nothing else. Just like his claiming to be secularist. Unless claiming to be a devout Muslim was in his favor, then he would declare for that as well.

Sorry, but you are trying to fit a claim that does not match the facts. His "Pan-Arab" beliefs were like his religion. Something to be used to try and gain support, but not really believed.

I disagree that Saddam was not a Pan-Arabist. He was heavily in support of unifying all Arab nations under one political system. Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt, and Sudan were actively working to unify their nations regionally. This is paramount to being a Pan-Arabist. Even if it was only to create a pathway to increased personal power, it was still his political position.

I do agree that his religious "rebirth" was simply a play to shore up support from a growing Islamist movement he knew he would not be able to contain.

Saddam rose to power and ruled for many years as a Ba'athist, adhering to the ideological path of Pan-Arab secularism and nationalism. He was a key player in the seizing of power by the Ba'ath party. He frequently espoused that religion was the most serious threat to Ba'ath rule, both publicly and privately. One of the main goals of the war with Iran was snuff out the Iraqi Shiite movement by defeating their main source of inspiration. And to keep Sunni Islamists, who were dissatisfied with secular rule, in check. Of course the war with Iran was a failure, and the resulting increase in Islamist discontent meant he was going to have to eventually change things up if he wanted to stay in power. His overtures to the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood were purely opportunistic and not very effective. It wasn't that he was trying to fuel the Islamist movement, it was because he wanted them to undermine his chief regional rival.

He didn't abandon the last vestiges Ba'athist secularism until a couple of years after getting defeated in Kuwait and being forced to put down a large Shiite uprising. The Faith Campaign was intended to mollify Islamists, not completely unlike the relationship that the House of Saud had with the Wahhabists. He acted as if he was a born again Muslim and supported the implementation of Sharia law, but it wasn't legitimate. The notion that Saddam had spent years radicalizing Iraq is patently absurd. There is a difference between radicalization and Islamization. Saddam's only interest in adopting theocratic tenets into his policy were, as you have stated, purely out of his own self-interest. He only openly supported militant Islamic extremism in Iraq when he was hiding from U.S. forces and trying to inspire anybody and everybody to fight U.S. forces. Again, nothing related to his personal beliefs - he was simply trying to avoid the hangman's noose.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

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?
/

So, you don't care that there was a "Project Mockingbird" and that it isn't what the CT sites says it was....

Or was it RT?

Never mind... Same BS, different wrapper.....
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

This is far more important than Russian conspiracies, tweets, or even domestic violence. Now that the war against ISIS is over in Syria, the US military has no business and no authority to be involved in a Syrian civil war. The constitution specifically states that the President is Commander when called into service, and that congress has the power to declare war, raise and support armies. Further, congress passed a law which specifically prohibits deployment without ongoing authorization from congress.



Unfortunately Trump is claiming he has unlimited power to wage war in the public interest, which simply isnt the case. Congress will need to act to keep him in check.

Congress is providing the funding, so Congress is effectively authorizing the use of force in Syria.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Congress is providing the funding, so Congress is effectively authorizing the use of force in Syria.

As pointed out, only to fight ISIS. Not to fight the Syrian govt.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

I disagree that Saddam was not a Pan-Arabist. He was heavily in support of unifying all Arab nations under one political system. Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt, and Sudan were actively working to unify their nations regionally.

No, it is not. He wanted all of the Arab world to fall in line with his own political beliefs and party, nothing else. What you are saying is like claiming that the Soviet Union was for "Global Liberation".

Sure, they were, so long as the political belief the nation wanted to follow was Marxism. Otherwise, they could not care less and actively fought against them.

His attacks on his neighbors, and supporting those who attacks other nations so long as it was convenient for him (Abu Nidal), then casting them aside when it was not of any kind of advantage (Abu Nidal) shows that he gave lip service at best to the idea of "Pan-Arabism".


Hence, his support of the Lebanese Phalanges Party in the Lebanese Civil War. A party that was closest to that of the Ba'Ath Party in Iraq, a nominally Fascist government, that was actually run by the various Christian minorities, and which actively rejected the "Arab" label, instead preferring to identify themselves as "Phonicians".

Which in the decades long Civil War was a major opponent of the "Arab Identity" groups in Lebanon.

Yes, your claims sure sound good, but they keep failing the smell test when looked at the actual groups and causes he supported.

So you can keep trying to claim he was a "Pan-Arab" until you are blue in the face. His constant support of groups and individuals that supported other agendas (as well as an invasion and attempted annexation of an Arab neighbor) continues to show that is wrong.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

As pointed out, only to fight ISIS. Not to fight the Syrian govt.

Wrong! We have worked diligently to destabilize Syria ever since Assad won the election against the CIA/NED candidate. We have financed all the rebels in Syria. The USA attitude is "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Dumbasses all.
/
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Wrong! We have worked diligently to destabilize Syria ever since Assad won the election against the CIA/NED candidate. We have financed all the rebels in Syria. The USA attitude is "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Dumbasses all.
/

Wrong! The funding bill states that the purpose of the funding is to fight ISIS.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Wrong! The funding bill states that the purpose of the funding is to fight ISIS.

Do you believe every word your government writes? You are easily led.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

I read what is passed into law, and it says to fight ISIS, not the Syrian govt.

Got it! You believe what's written, whether it's true or not.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

We're discussing the law, not intention.

Do you understand that the law can be written any way its authors choose? That a law may be written in error? Or that it may have no legal authority?
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Wrong! The funding bill states that the purpose of the funding is to fight ISIS.

Golly Gee! Just get al Qeda/Nusra front/Jabhat al sham/ISIS to give back the money and arms. By the way, what does the funding say for CIA and PMCs? Wait, that's clsasified and we can't discuss it. Lots of that goin' 'round.
/
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Do you understand that the law can be written any way its authors choose? That a law may be written in error? Or that it may have no legal authority?

Yeah, but hows its written is what matters when discussing legal authority.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Golly Gee! Just get al Qeda/Nusra front/Jabhat al sham/ISIS to give back the money and arms. By the way, what does the funding say for CIA and PMCs? Wait, that's clsasified and we can't discuss it. Lots of that goin' 'round.
/

No idea, its classified, so no real point arguing hypotheticals.
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

No idea, its classified, so no real point arguing hypotheticals.

The point is that you have no clue where monies are being spent in Syria. Billions of CIA dollars and you ignore them because they don't fit your beliefs, not to be confused with facts.
/
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Thank you David!
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

Golly Gee! Just get al Qeda/Nusra front/Jabhat al sham/ISIS to give back the money and arms. By the way, what does the funding say for CIA and PMCs? Wait, that's clsasified and we can't discuss it. Lots of that goin' 'round.
/

Golly Gee! Dishonestly conflating entities again...
 
Re: Trump Exceding Authority in Syria

The point is that you have no clue where monies are being spent in Syria. Billions of CIA dollars and you ignore them because they don't fit your beliefs, not to be confused with facts.
/

And yet you keep trying to push the CIA funds and arms ISIS....
 
Back
Top Bottom