Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

You want your chief diplomat to be a diplomat


Yamato

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Man, I'm pretty Conservative, but I have always agreed that the Iraq War (not the first Gulf War) was a horrible mistake. Nothing good came out of that war. Even the death of Saddam Hussein was unnecessary. 

The people coming into Trump's cabinet right now could never say that.

If they're going to take the oil, Iraq War 2 is the very thing that made it possible.  We're exploiting another war-manufactured opportunity if the oil is something good that comes out of the war.  *sigh*

Does anyone for one moment actually believe that putting rings around the oil fields and taking the oil won't encourage fifty or a hundred more years of "war on terror"?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 hours ago, Astra. said:

Agree...it's easy for Trump to say off the cuff "I would bomb the sh**out of ISIS"......but of course there has to be a fine strategy applied and put into place....before this can happen.

I'm sure if he appoints the proper and the most experienced people to guide him by doing things in the right manner...there will possibly be less casualties. 

Well he's got the job now. I'm not immediately encouraged that he'll do much different, but we'll see.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to hand it to Trump, on what we've seen so far, he can't be accused of not being extremely gracious in his dealings with people who openly derided him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Arbenol said:

 

But is does matter how this is done. Clearly it will require the use of force, as Aquatus said. But at what cost.

Will Trump join Putin in bombing civilians? Will he put US troops on the ground? What level of innocent casualties and bereaved American families is acceptable in achieving the goal?

I think it matters very much how he goes about it.

 Their children from day one are taught from Their parents mind you to do horrible acts against humanity.  I believe a learning lesson might be valuable to them but they won't adhere. Their ineptitude to comply with living socially among others is out the window. So with that I say I don't care the least bit how they go about it. Just get it done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Kurzweil said:

 Their children from day one are taught from Their parents mind you to do horrible acts against humanity.  I believe a learning lesson might be valuable to them but they won't adhere. Their ineptitude to comply with living socially among others is out the window. So with that I say I don't care the least bit how they go about it. Just get it done.

Apparently you don't buy into the theory that foreign military action in the region has created the conditions under which these ideologies have flourished.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt various elements of the old Iraq were dealt a dud hand after 2003, and became radicalized, it is a familiar pattern seen historically across the world. ISIL is as much a creation of that upheaval, as anything else. The fact that they advertised their brutality to the world ("Jihad John", e,g,) via video etc, rates as a monumental error on their part. Otherwise I doubt they'd be much in the news at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if it wasn't for the green screen productions of merely ranting with a knife  (aka showing "their brutality"), the mass media would stop throwing "ISIS" in our face, and the USA wouldn't have to go over there and defeat them?   So that's another way of saying that ISIS propaganda drives our foreign policy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Yamato said:

The people coming into Trump's cabinet right now could never say that.

If they're going to take the oil, Iraq War 2 is the very thing that made it possible.  We're exploiting another war-manufactured opportunity if the oil is something good that comes out of the war.  *sigh*

Does anyone for one moment actually believe that putting rings around the oil fields and taking the oil won't encourage fifty or a hundred more years of "war on terror"?

Well we did a very good job of "taking" that oil. ISIS grabbed it in the north away for Iraq without so much as an US soldier firing a shot.

I suppose we were not paying them for that oil either? 

(Sigh.....)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Arbenol said:

Apparently you don't buy into the theory that foreign military action in the region has created the conditions under which these ideologies have flourished.

I think the fail was that the policy makers in the US thought that Afghanistan, and Iraq, would decide that the way of their conquerors was better, as Japan, Germany, and to an extent Russia and China have done. But, the culture of the region was deeply embedded and they resisted assimilation more then most other cultures. It was this fail to bring them to cherish our American culture, that resulted in the violent backlash, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I think the fail was that the policy makers in the US thought that Afghanistan, and Iraq, would decide that the way of their conquerors was better, as Japan, Germany, and to an extent Russia and China have done. But, the culture of the region was deeply embedded and they resisted assimilation more then most other cultures. It was this fail to bring them to cherish our American culture, that resulted in the violent backlash, I think.

Sarcasm?  If so, what do you really believe happened in the Mideast?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Well we did a very good job of "taking" that oil. ISIS grabbed it in the north away for Iraq without so much as an US soldier firing a shot.

I suppose we were not paying them for that oil either? 

(Sigh.....)

This shouldn't even be happening at all, to make us have to even suffer such questions.   Now the frame of discussion is micromanaging how to take the oil.   Well.

Sorry to be the one to have to say it but Obama's foreign policy sucked.  <-- News

Clinton's, Bush's and Obama's foreign policy sucked. 

That any of us are so willing to enjoy the way these leaders have set the table over there, to go and feast at it, we're not going to make anything great we're going to blow up the world.  We're going to make an even greater mountain of money for the military industrial complex though, if that's what our "interests" are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Likely Guy said:

Sarcasm?  If so, what do you really believe happened in the Mideast?

Aside from the wars, we tried to press our culture on them. They hated that more then any war that happened. IMHO. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
5 hours ago, Yamato said:

So if it wasn't for the green screen productions of merely ranting with a knife  (aka showing "their brutality"), the mass media would stop throwing "ISIS" in our face, and the USA wouldn't have to go over there and defeat them?   So that's another way of saying that ISIS propaganda drives our foreign policy.

That's about the size of it, the bombing campaign only happened after that incredible PR gaffe by the lunatics  slitting the throats of westerners, on TV screens. Right ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Yamato said:

This shouldn't even be happening at all, to make us have to even suffer such questions.   Now the frame of discussion is micromanaging how to take the oil.   Well.

Sorry to be the one to have to say it but Obama's foreign policy sucked.  <-- News

Clinton's, Bush's and Obama's foreign policy sucked. 

That any of us are so willing to enjoy the way these leaders have set the table over there, to go and feast at it, we're not going to make anything great we're going to blow up the world.  We're going to make an even greater mountain of money for the military industrial complex though, if that's what our "interests" are.

Yes, yes, yes... blah, Foreign Policy... blah, Military Industrial Complex... blah, Stolen Oil... 

Almost everyone is familiar with these talking points. Is Iraq really constrained to sell the US oil, or we'll go to war again? Is that written down in a treaty somewhere?

If oil is being stolen, it is due to corrupt Iraqi officials, and those working with them. I doubt there is some conspiracy where Obama himself was cackling with glee at billions of dollars of stolen oil. I've simply not seen evidence of high level government actions to steal oil.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Habitat said:

That's about the size of it, the bombing campaign only happened after that incredible PR gaffe by the lunatics  slitting the throats of westerners, on TV screens. Right ?

Wrong.  The bombing campaign started in 1991.  The economic warfare started in 1981.    The criminal shenanigans in Israel started long before that.

Iran had F-14s, in the 70s.   How smart or dumb was that?  

An Act of Congress to stop arming the Middle East would be a meaningful shift in our foreign policy today.   Of course we love Raytheon's common stock going to the moon.  That's the only real reason people really have to disagree.  If blood money is that important, fine.  But it's all just political excuses sans that.   And I for one believe that blood money is evil. Based on all appearances there will be blood money to come in the Trump administration.  

We've finally adopted "Islamic" in the rhetoric of our top leadership.  That sounds like a dark and ominous inflection point in our country's short history.

The government of this country has a duty to stop causing the problem and rewarding evil people with the solution.   This profitable c*** n balls dirt fight we're choosing to engage in against Islam that the neoconservatives have decided upon for us isn't more important than the rule of law and our rights.  It's not even a sad fraction of it.   It has no value.  The First Amendment does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yamato said:

Wrong.  The bombing campaign started in 1991. 

Obviously I am referring to the current aerial bombing campaign in Iraq/Syria against daesh, or ISIL, or whatever they call it now. That bombing only started after those atrocities were broadcast. I doubt we'd have heard much at all without that. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Yes, yes, yes... blah, Foreign Policy... blah, Military Industrial Complex... blah, Stolen Oil... 

Almost everyone is familiar with these talking points. Is Iraq really constrained to sell the US oil, or we'll go to war again? Is that written down in a treaty somewhere?

If oil is being stolen, it is due to corrupt Iraqi officials, and those working with them. I doubt there is some conspiracy where Obama himself was cackling with glee at billions of dollars of stolen oil. I've simply not seen evidence of high level government actions to steal oil.

That's not relevant to what I said.   I've never said "stolen oil" before in my life.

If our government is taking it, it must be legal.   So "stolen" doesn't make any sense. 

Let's actually believe in free markets and not just talk.  If the people (the States and their federal representatives) choose to do or not do something, the federal rule should be in accordance with that.   If we choose not to pack our own bags, and go over there and fight for another goddamned oil well or whatever the trucking reason, then we must have other priorities.   Spend YOUR money on whichever side you like best in the Middle East.   More power to ya.   But stop spending mine.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Obviously I am referring to the current aerial bombing campaign in Iraq/Syria against daesh, or ISIL, or whatever they call it now. That bombing only started after those atrocities were broadcast. I doubt we'd have heard much at all without that. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Make the people afraid, and you can do what you want out there!   Exactly.

Not that Obama needed anymore special permission to bomb people.  He had no limits to his restraint other than his own personal restraint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I think the fail was that the policy makers in the US thought that Afghanistan, and Iraq, would decide that the way of their conquerors was better, as Japan, Germany, and to an extent Russia and China have done. But, the culture of the region was deeply embedded and they resisted assimilation more then most other cultures. It was this fail to bring them to cherish our American culture, that resulted in the violent backlash, I think.

You can't force democracy on people. It's never worked and never will.

I disagree about culture though. I doubt the majority of Iraqis hate American culture more than they hate American bombs.

But I dont think any attempt to impose culture happened. Beyond opening a McDonalds - the best defence there is against US bombs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Yamato said:

That's not relevant to what I said.   I've never said "stolen oil" before in my life.

If our government is taking it, it must be legal.   So "stolen" doesn't make any sense. 

OK, so if it is Taken, but not Stolen, then what.. ? They're being forced to sell it only to us? Is that a serious belief?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

OK, so if it is Taken, but not Stolen, then what.. ?

Then fighters and jihadists come pouring in from all directions to engage us in our c*** n balls dirt fight with Islam that feeds right into the hands of why this madness is happening at all. 

Quote

They're being forced to sell it only to us? Is that a serious belief?

It doesn't matter.   Either way, they're being forced to suffer our invasion.  

Islamic jihadists threw the Soviets out of Afghanistan, and their religious belief makes them better warriors.    That's a serious belief. 

If we don't think that "putting rings and taking the oil" is going to set the world on fire, then we haven't learned much about these results we've been getting for all these decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Rudy Giuliani OUT of Trump Cabinet.   Just because Rudy used to give Trump special favors in NY doesn't mean that the most powerful man on the planet has to kiss up to him now.  Trump used him up in the campaign though.  

Who couldn't love "America's Mayor" in drag?

 

We've still got Bolton and Romney and Corker in the running?  

Mitt Romney seems ready to Obey the Donald to his utmost.  Romney was the most popular guy the Republicans could run for President, so Sec. of State Mitt Romney would be a great gift to the Republican Establishment.  

It's reported that Rudy threw in the towel the night Donald and Mitt had dinner together.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/former-nyc-mayor-rudolph-giuliani-out-running-trump-cabinet-n694186

It's good riddance to Rudy though, isn't it?   Just based on the video above, I think it's possible we might be able to find someone better for the job somewhere in the whole country.

Trump also seemed to leave the door open for something possible in the future:   "I will always be appreciative of his 24/7 dedication to our campaign after I won the primaries and for his extremely wise counsel.   He is and continues to be a close personal friend, and as appropriate, I will call upon him for advice and can see an important place for him in the administration at a later date."

Edited by Yamato
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.