Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I never said anything about being pro war. All I said was omg someone make me feel better about what is going to be a major humanitarian crisis and chemical deaths of tens of thousands. You guys have a point, what's the difference, high explosives vs chem. But nerve gas us no joke guys look it up .... Google phosgene ww1. jason Sorry for venting, but I work with a lot of paranoid ultra conservative conspiracy nuts who still use the N word and own 50 guns. This is where I go to escape that, and I was very nuetral with this thread and got totally reamed for it like I'm waving a bush Cheney sign. All I'm saying is if nyones getting used for a punching bag its me.
At this point in time, my preference is a very limited action...probably the cruise missiles, and at most a no-fly zone.And yes, Jeffrey, it is a good example of "damned if you do and damned if you don't."
jason Sorry for venting, but I work with a lot of paranoid ultra conservative conspiracy nuts who still use the N word and own 50 guns. This is where I go to escape that, and I was very nuetral with this thread and got totally reamed for it like I'm waving a bush Cheney sign. All I'm saying is if nyones getting used for a punching bag its me.
I guess it's a language problem? I have no idea what point you're making.
That's the problem.
Well, you're not helping, so I'll ask in a more clear way. You said, "why are countries like israel and pakistan allowed to have nuclear weapons?"
Which legal body would prevent them from having such weapons? How would they prevent them from having such weapons?
Well if USA and UK blow the shit out of Syria, it won't matter much because then everyone will be blowing people up. Look at Russia's veiled threat to Obama.......
I guess it's a language problem? I have no idea what point you're making.
That's the problem.
Well, you're not helping, so I'll ask in a more clear way. You said, "why are countries like israel and pakistan allowed to have nuclear weapons?"
Which legal body would prevent them from having such weapons? How would they prevent them from having such weapons?
Well if USA and UK blow the shit out of Syria, it won't matter much because then everyone will be blowing people up. Look at Russia's veiled threat to Obama.......
The US WANTS TO ENCOURAGE A WAR WITH SYRIA, IRAN, RUSSIA AND WHOEVER ELSE, this is why this is happening.. I just read on the BBC news that the US government is 'certain' that the Syrian state has used chemical weapons against it's people and are ready to strike when Obama says, how convenient for them. Well this is another step closer to world war 3, in fact it has already begun a while ago with all of the proxy wars. With world war 2 we all learned or saw that it started when Hitler invaded Poland etc, in fact the war had begun way before then due to many strategic proxy wars and infiltration.
If I had a crystal ball and could see the consequences for the Syrian woman and man in the street if the west intervened, and if we didn't, then I could form an opinion. But I dont. It seems to me that intervention could well lead to an oppressive Islamist regime, or to an situation like Egypt where we support democratic elections and a year later back those who over turn a decision we don't like. Or like Libya where we help overthrow a despot..and the result is wisespread chaos crime and anarchy. I am not smart enough to pick a side.
america needs a complete reform. kick all the politics out and renew the people in all the branches of government.
i think this whole ordeal is people letting their egos run their lives thats all i think when i hear anything that has to do with much of the usa.
#tobadcountryhoppingisntfree
Yeah. Thats gonna happen. Jeez.
Once there are enough people with a similar ideology and dissatisfaction for the government, the collected anger and frustration hits a tipping point and then a multitude of things can happen. In the case of the US considering the amount of power it has in the armed forces, I would think not very good for the population unless they have reached out enough to people in the police and army. That is the only way, to actually reveal to people of all walks of life what is actually going on, that way you can dismantle the people at the top with more ease and less suffering.
Just the refreshing breeze of reality. Its just possible that the US government is going to be brought to its knees by six Buddhist Che Guevaras , some of whom still live with Mom and Pop. But I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
Just the refreshing breeze of reality. Its just possible that the US government is going to be brought to its knees by six Buddhist Che Guevaras , some of whom still live with Mom and Pop. But I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
The amount of people reaches into 5 figures at least. We shall see what transpires in the next couple of years, what is happening now in Syria though certainly has a lot of people creating a lot of fuss all over the internet that is for sure.
Like I said, it doesn't really matter how unsatisfied people are with their govt unless it personally affects them. Sad as it is, Syria does not and the average American just believes what they see on Good Morning, America because those friendly faces would never tell us wrong. More than 80% of the American people already disapprove of the job the government is doing. That's about 260 million people. So far, no uprising. I personally don't see it happening any time soon. Fewer than 10% of Americans right now support military action in Syria. So, we agree on 2 things as a citizenry, lol. But there still isn't going to be a riot over it. Or an uprising, Or a revolution.
Like I said, it doesn't really matter how unsatisfied people are with their govt unless it personally affects them. Sad as it is, Syria does not and the average American just believes what they see on Good Morning, America because those friendly faces would never tell us wrong. More than 80% of the American people already disapprove of the job the government is doing. That's about 260 million people. So far, no uprising. I personally don't see it happening any time soon. Fewer than 10% of Americans right now support military action in Syria. So, we agree on 2 things as a citizenry, lol. But there still isn't going to be a riot over it. Or an uprising, Or a revolution.
I suspect you are right @karasti. Here neither. The best we can hope for in the UK is that at the next General Election we have a different coalition government... :eek2:
I think the key is that it doesn't just take a group of people who have the same thoughts, or even priorities to get together and have a revolution. It usually seems to take a large group of people who are directly suffering as a result of the actions of their government. At this point, the US is mostly annoyed and frustrated at not getting what they want out of their congress. but even when more people were suffering losing their homes and jobs, it wasn't enough to push them to riot against the government. There is not enough of a perceived suffering due to the government for people to band together.
Like I said, it doesn't really matter how unsatisfied people are with their govt unless it personally affects them. Sad as it is, Syria does not and the average American just believes what they see on Good Morning, America because those friendly faces would never tell us wrong. More than 80% of the American people already disapprove of the job the government is doing. That's about 260 million people. So far, no uprising. I personally don't see it happening any time soon. Fewer than 10% of Americans right now support military action in Syria. So, we agree on 2 things as a citizenry, lol. But there still isn't going to be a riot over it. Or an uprising, Or a revolution.
I suspect you are right @karasti. Here neither. The best we can hope for in the UK is that at the next General Election we have a different coalition government... :eek2:
I guess it's a language problem? I have no idea what point you're making.
That's the problem.
Well, you're not helping, so I'll ask in a more clear way. You said, "why are countries like israel and pakistan allowed to have nuclear weapons?"
Which legal body would prevent them from having such weapons? How would they prevent them from having such weapons?
North Korea already has nuclear weapons. There is no legal body that can prevent Iran from getting them. Sanctions can make things uncomfortable for the Iranian people and to a lesser degree their government. Israel could bomb what they believe to be iran's nuclear weapons facilities, but that's no guarantee that weapons won't be produced.
I would guess so jll. But I think a Lab/Libdem coalition is a real possibility...
Sorry to say this, but do you think that voting either way is going to make a profound difference? It is worse in the US where the 2 government system is an illusion and they are both one of the same in the a sense, but you cannot vote away this problem that exists today, it cannot be voted away.
I would guess so jll. But I think a Lab/Libdem coalition is a real possibility...
Sorry to say this, but do you think that voting either way is going to make a profound difference? It is worse in the US where the 2 government system is an illusion and they are both one of the same in the a sense, but you cannot vote away this problem that exists today, it cannot be voted away.
No I think it will make no difference at all. As the anarchists say 'whoever you vote for the government gets in '. But neither do I think that any of the developed nations are going to experience revolution. So I will vote , and I will vote for what seems to be the least worst option at the time.
@jll I'm curious what legal (or illegal) body you are referring to. There are guidelines that countries are ideally supposed to follow but it's basically on the honor system and not all the countries have signed it. We don't have a world government that regulates all this and therefore can enforce it. UN inspectors can't even go into the countries to look around without permission.
I would guess so jll. But I think a Lab/Libdem coalition is a real possibility...
Sorry to say this, but do you think that voting either way is going to make a profound difference? It is worse in the US where the 2 government system is an illusion and they are both one of the same in the a sense, but you cannot vote away this problem that exists today, it cannot be voted away.
Anyone who thinks that -- at this time in American history -- the Republicans/Tea-Partiers are the same as the Democrats needs a serious course on current American culture.
I would guess so jll. But I think a Lab/Libdem coalition is a real possibility...
Sorry to say this, but do you think that voting either way is going to make a profound difference? It is worse in the US where the 2 government system is an illusion and they are both one of the same in the a sense, but you cannot vote away this problem that exists today, it cannot be voted away.
Anyone who things that -- at this time in American history -- the Republicans/Tea-Partiers are the same as the Democrats needs a serious course on current American culture.
Dunno about that. But there is little difference between the current Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat policies here in the UK.
Yep. There are definitely major differences. Take a look at how historically republican states are run verses historically democratic ones. Very big differences in a lot of areas. On the national stage the differences still exist, it's just that with a large congress, unless congress and the president all lean heavily to one side, it's not as obvious. Instead the 2 sides just fight against each other like 2 pigs in a blanket. But the differences are still there. If we had a republican president and house and senate, we would not have Obamacare going through, for example, which is already making big changes in a lot of people's lives.
Do I think that who I vote for will suddenly cause a major change in US foreign policy? Not really. There are differences in how each side thinks about it, but no matter what a person running for president thinks, the reality of what it is once they take office, is different.
Any thoughts on how our potential actions (US) will have on the response from Iran, Russia or China?
Well, Russia have threatened if the US strike, there'll be consequences. They've been vague by not defining them. Iran however have emphatically stated they'll strike Israel, that however is just an excuse. They've been itching to do that forever. China, well I'd be more worried about China myself. You can never guess with them and that's what makes them a big risk.
Any thoughts on how our potential actions (US) will have on the response from Iran, Russia or China?
Well, Russia have threatened if the US strike, there'll be consequences. They've been vague by not defining them. Iran however have emphatically stated they'll strike Israel, that however is just an excuse. They've been itching to do that forever. China, well I'd be more worried about China myself. You can never guess with them and that's what makes them a big risk.
I can't see China wanting to rock the boat they are in with the US. Too much business at stake. I'm not sure what the Russians could do other than complain about it. The Iranians would have to have rocks in their heads to attack Israel directly. Who is going to back them up? Syria will just have had their military pounded. The Egyptian military is playing nice with Israel right now and they have no government to speak of. Iran is in turmoil. The Lebanese got bombed to pieces last time they tried anything. Maybe the Palestinians could lob a few rockets their way. That's how it looks to me.
Am I wrong? Is that essentially one (or a small group) of bloggers? I'd like to know their credentials.
They are a small group with a somewhat large following. This is how methodical they are and transparent. They are very computer savvy and IMO know what is going on in the world a lot clearer than the vast majority of people.
Do you think that people who are set on going against something as huge as the US government want all of their credentials and so forth out in the open so blatantly? For me personally credentials in this instance does not make much of a difference if you spend the time to go through the videos, check the sources and understand where they are coming from. It is kind of like meeting the Buddha 2,500 years ago, getting some advice from him and saying 'you are some homeless wandering person with no credentials, therefore I shall formulate everything you say around that basis'
So I went to look at their page on youtube and now they are backpedaling on information they not only released but told people to share. Honestly, I saw enough in a couple scrolls through their twitter feed to know I won't bother. Everything from the US killed MLK to the US is purposely brain damaging most of the population with both drinking water and the education system. Someone who probably rarely leaves their house, but gets information only from the internet...which is just as fakeable and just as biased as any other sort of information. They aren't on the scene, they aren't local to Syria or Chechnya or Iran or any of the other places they claim to know so much about. Their information can all be easily faked, and they have no actual sources, just their own swirling thoughts that they form into theories. They don't know any more about the world than someone who gets all their news from GMA, it's just a different sort of skewed information. Not a single one of us knows the truth of the situation because we aren't there. I don't know, you don't know, these guys don't know.
Do you think that people who are set on going against something as huge as the US government want all of their credentials and so forth out in the open so blatantly? ...
For anyone interested, I think Sujato Bhikkhu makes some good points about why we shouldn't bomb/invade Syria in his most recent blog post, and I'm inclined to agree with him.
For those interested in the moral ethics of intervention, read up on the United Nations Responsibility to Protect. I'm currently doing a masters thesis on the Impact of Conflict on Cultural Heritage and it involves me researching the nature of international conflicts.
Standing by and doing nothing is not an option; it has been done before and leads to more serious inhumane acts that cannot be allowed to happen.
For further reading, the autobiography of Kofi Annan is a great place to start.
For those interested in the moral ethics of intervention, read up on the United Nations Responsibility to Protect. I'm currently doing a masters thesis on the Impact of Conflict on Cultural Heritage and it involves me researching the nature of international conflicts.
Standing by and doing nothing is not an option; it has been done before and leads to more serious inhumane acts that cannot be allowed to happen.
...
It really comes down to crime and punishment -- a philosophy we may not like, but which faces us in many facets of everyday life.
Comments
But nerve gas us no joke guys look it up .... Google phosgene ww1.
jason Sorry for venting, but I work with a lot of paranoid ultra conservative conspiracy nuts who still use the N word and own 50 guns. This is where I go to escape that, and I was very nuetral with this thread and got totally reamed for it like I'm waving a bush Cheney sign. All I'm saying is if nyones getting used for a punching bag its me.
talk about double standards.
let's just call a spade a spade.
talk about double standards.
let's just call a spade a spade.
Which legal body would prevent them from having such weapons?
How would they prevent them from having such weapons?
to prevent iran and north korea from getting nuclear weapons.
It seems to me that intervention could well lead to an oppressive Islamist regime, or to an situation like Egypt where we support democratic elections and a year later back those who over turn a decision we don't like. Or like Libya where we help overthrow a despot..and the result is wisespread chaos crime and anarchy.
I am not smart enough to pick a side.
i think this whole ordeal is people letting their egos run their lives thats all i think when i hear anything that has to do with much of the usa.
#tobadcountryhoppingisntfree
Nice sunny day here. Hints of autumn already. Mist on the river at dawn.
Its just possible that the US government is going to be brought to its knees by six Buddhist Che Guevaras , some of whom still live with Mom and Pop.
But I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
the voters in the last elections, by joining the
tories.
citta, are they going to be punished by the voters this time around?
There is no legal body that can prevent Iran from getting them. Sanctions can make things uncomfortable for the Iranian people and to a lesser degree their government.
Israel could bomb what they believe to be iran's nuclear weapons facilities, but that's no guarantee that weapons won't be produced.
But neither do I think that any of the developed nations are going to experience revolution.
So I will vote , and I will vote for what seems to be the least worst option at the time.
Do I think that who I vote for will suddenly cause a major change in US foreign policy? Not really. There are differences in how each side thinks about it, but no matter what a person running for president thinks, the reality of what it is once they take office, is different.
I'm not sure what the Russians could do other than complain about it.
The Iranians would have to have rocks in their heads to attack Israel directly. Who is going to back them up?
Syria will just have had their military pounded. The Egyptian military is playing nice with Israel right now and they have no government to speak of. Iran is in turmoil. The Lebanese got bombed to pieces last time they tried anything. Maybe the Palestinians could lob a few rockets their way.
That's how it looks to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6R7knc-G360#t=76
Honestly, I saw enough in a couple scrolls through their twitter feed to know I won't bother. Everything from the US killed MLK to the US is purposely brain damaging most of the population with both drinking water and the education system. Someone who probably rarely leaves their house, but gets information only from the internet...which is just as fakeable and just as biased as any other sort of information. They aren't on the scene, they aren't local to Syria or Chechnya or Iran or any of the other places they claim to know so much about. Their information can all be easily faked, and they have no actual sources, just their own swirling thoughts that they form into theories. They don't know any more about the world than someone who gets all their news from GMA, it's just a different sort of skewed information. Not a single one of us knows the truth of the situation because we aren't there. I don't know, you don't know, these guys don't know.
Standing by and doing nothing is not an option; it has been done before and leads to more serious inhumane acts that cannot be allowed to happen.
For further reading, the autobiography of Kofi Annan is a great place to start.