Login

10-30-2015, 03:21 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/30/politics/s...index.html

Hmm, I seem to remember another President doing something like this in the 60's, where we sent in Green Berets to train some local indigenous forces, and from what I know from history, that ended pretty badly.

EricC85 · 10-30-2015, 04:18 PM

Anytime we get mixed into these regimes change regional conflicts it ends bad for us. You'd think we would learn that by now?

MalabarJag · 10-30-2015, 04:29 PM

Putting US ground forces under the place Russia is bombing doesn't sound exactly bright, either.

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

boudreaumw · 10-30-2015, 04:30 PM

Just no.

jj82284 · 10-30-2015, 04:42 PM

Did he ask putin first?

boudreaumw · 10-30-2015, 05:30 PM

Some people just don't want to grow up and sit at the adults table. Sad. Predictable but sad.

10-30-2015, 06:01 PM

Quote:Putting US ground forces under the place Russia is bombing doesn't sound exactly bright, either.

Obama's practically begging for an international incident.

boudreaumw · 10-30-2015, 06:02 PM

Quote:Obama's practically begging for an international incident.

I'm sure whatever the reasoning is he thinks it's the right move. Just like every other CIC that has done the same or similar over the last what 50 years or so?

10-30-2015, 06:29 PM

Quote:I'm sure whatever the reasoning is he thinks it's the right move. Just like every other CIC that has done the same or similar over the last what 50 years or so?

I just don't believe we should be sending troops into Iraq and Syria period. Too much of our blood and treasure has been lost for that god forsaken sandbox. It's time to focus on America's needs. Maybe Obama and DoD know something about the situation in Syria that the public is not aware of, but when you start sending in special forces to aid and assist on the ground, and add Russia, Iran, and ISIS to the mix, you're asking for trouble.

It's literally the exact same scenario as Vietnam in the 60's. Provide intelligence, air, and naval support, send in advisers, and then wait for an incident to happen in order to justify the use of ground forces (Gulf of Tonkin). It's like watching a rerun to a bad sitcom-except the joke is on America.

boudreaumw · 10-30-2015, 06:39 PM

Quote:I just don't believe we should be sending troops into Iraq and Syria period. Too much of our blood and treasure has been lost for that god forsaken sandbox. It's time to focus on America's needs. Maybe Obama and DoD know something about the situation in Syria that the public is not aware of, but when you start sending in special forces to aid and assist on the ground, and add Russia, Iran, and ISIS to the mix, you're asking for trouble.

It's literally the exact same scenario as Vietnam in the 60's. Provide intelligence, air, and naval support, send in advisers, and then wait for an incident to happen in order to justify the use of ground forces (Gulf of Tonkin). It's like watching a rerun to a bad sitcom-except the joke is on America.

Oh I agree completely. We keep doing the same things and getting results that are, at the best, unfavorable. Does not matter which party is in power or the the person in the chair. Makes me wonder if maybe the issue leading us to constantly intervene in everything isn't the person making the call but the people "advising" the dude in the chair. Not sure TBH.

americus 2.0 · 10-30-2015, 07:04 PM

Quote:Oh I agree completely. We keep doing the same things and getting results that are, at the best, unfavorable. Does not matter which party is in power or the the person in the chair. Makes me wonder if maybe the issue leading us to constantly intervene in everything isn't the person making the call but the people "advising" the dude in the chair. Not sure TBH.

So much this. I am of the opinion that Iraq was all Cheney and Rumsfeld. I was living in Germany when 9/11 happened and we went to Afghanistan. The Germans had no problem with it based on the knowledge we had at the time. They were very supportive. And I'm speaking for the actual folks I talked to, not politicians.

As soon as we started talking about going into Iraq though, they were not so supportive of that, at all. They were wondering how Bush could be such an idiot (their words) and there had to be something going on that the public wasn't being told. I believe Rumsfeld and Cheney were jerking Bush's chain until he finally caved. There are people from that administration who felt the same and wrote as much in their books. Whether it's true or not, who knows. But it's something I've suspected for a very long time.

EricC85 · 10-30-2015, 08:47 PM

Quote:Oh I agree completely. We keep doing the same things and getting results that are, at the best, unfavorable. Does not matter which party is in power or the the person in the chair. Makes me wonder if maybe the issue leading us to constantly intervene in everything isn't the person making the call but the people "advising" the dude in the chair. Not sure TBH.

It's called the new world order and I fully believe it's real.

10-30-2015, 09:16 PM

Quote:Oh I agree completely. We keep doing the same things and getting results that are, at the best, unfavorable. Does not matter which party is in power or the the person in the chair. Makes me wonder if maybe the issue leading us to constantly intervene in everything isn't the person making the call but the people "advising" the dude in the chair. Not sure TBH.

Quote:So much this. I am of the opinion that Iraq was all Cheney and Rumsfeld. I was living in Germany when 9/11 happened and we went to Afghanistan. The Germans had no problem with it based on the knowledge we had at the time. They were very supportive. And I'm speaking for the actual folks I talked to, not politicians.

As soon as we started talking about going into Iraq though, they were not so supportive of that, at all. They were wondering how Bush could be such an idiot (their words) and there had to be something going on that the public wasn't being told. I believe Rumsfeld and Cheney were jerking Bush's chain until he finally caved. There are people from that administration who felt the same and wrote as much in their books. Whether it's true or not, who knows. But it's something I've suspected for a very long time.

If you were to ask anybody in Washington who was working there during that time, most would agree that Cheney and Rumsfeld were the ones who were pushing the administrations agenda and advocating for many of the more controversial policies; especially the ones related to the Global War on Terror.

Kotite · 11-03-2015, 10:09 AM

I think Russia escalating their involvement applied pressure to make this move.

Only a chump boos the home team!

Byron LeftTown · 11-03-2015, 11:03 AM

How can we accuse Russia of starting WW3 if we don't have any official "boots" in Syria for them to bomb? False flag coming soon.

WingerDinger · 11-15-2015, 01:18 PM

My brother is refueling jets in Incirlik. I talked to him a couple days ago, he wasn't foolin when he said jets were taking off loaded with missles and coming back empty..

KlrJgFn · 11-16-2015, 01:26 PM

Quote:My brother is refueling jets in Incirlik. I talked to him a couple days ago, he wasn't foolin when he said jets were taking off loaded with missles and coming back empty..

Godspeed

Kaishakunin for hire.

* (disclaimer) If you think I'm serious, hit yourself in the face w/ a hammer.

**flsprtsgod** · 11-16-2015, 01:50 PM

Quote:How can we accuse Russia of starting WW3 if we don't have any official "boots" in Syria for them to bomb? False flag coming soon.

How can we declare Martial Law and suspend the elections if we don't have WW3?

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato