Jump to content

U.S. Politics


maqroll

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, jon_c said:

US on MOAB strikee: "There is no evidence of civilian casualties"

Of course not, it completely obliterates everything in a mile radius. 

Hopefully. Did you look at where the strike took place. A remote part of the Hindu Kush mountains on the Af/Pak border, and ISIS-K's main base location in Afghanistan. 

They didn't drop on a civilian area, it's the place to go if you find Antarctica a bit too metropolitan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

All this bullshit about civilians could of been killed. The only people who would of been in that area were terrorists or people helping terrorists.

Or an unlucky goat herder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, US v DPRK... could that kick off? Seems tense and with 2 nutters in charge, it only needs someone to blink first and it could go off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Xela said:

So, US v DPRK... could that kick off? Seems tense and with 2 nutters in charge, it only needs someone to blink first and it could go off. 

It could.

It won't.

North Korea has a pistol to South Korea's head in the shape of lots of armaments aimed directly at Seoul. Anything happens to North Korea and Seoul gets considerably flatter.

Then add in that this is just about a nuclear state that we know very little about and you play a dangerous game. You might try to target every suspected nuclear site, it only takes them having 1 hidden away you don't know about to cause a catastrophe.

And there's the China side of things...

North Korea will keep on making a noise and being irritating and the US will keep sabre rattling and nothing will change.

Donald can keep dropping millions of dollars in the desert to try to prop up his terrible numbers without opening Pandora's box without a lid to replace.

Edited by Chindie
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just out of interest, but I don't recall the USA declaring war on Afghanistan at any point - technically and legally, if there's no war isn't everyone a civilian?

At best you could be a criminal, but you surely need a war if you're to be anything other than a civilian?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

Just out of interest, but I don't recall the USA declaring war on Afghanistan at any point - technically and legally, if there's no war isn't everyone a civilian?

At best you could be a criminal, but you surely need a war if you're to be anything other than a civilian?

 

I'm with you on a lot of stuff but I think you're arguing here that the final fighting  hasn't been a war conducted in Afghan since 2001.

450+ dead Brits would say different (if they could) but the reality is there has and continues to be a savage war there.

No western party has ever described it as this because doing so means a whole chain of consequences, but nevertheless it is and has been a hugely under resourced armed conflict.

The focus on escalating now and n Afghanistan rests primarily on the assessment that the Afghan Gov are about to get their pants pulled down. That would be disasterous for the west in general so a policy of keeping it ticking over is preferable to an admission of defeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i appreciate that there's conflict in Afghanistan, it's another country that's been turned into an absolute mess though generations of conquest, counter conquest and war between the locals, their neighbours and those from further away with a vested interest in all that gas and clear routes to get it where it needs to be, I know that conflict is ongoing and whilst I wasn't aware of the numbers I was certainly aware that British troops had died there defending erm..whatever it is we're up to.

I'm interested in the way we report it and the way in which we use propaganda to justify what is in fact a war for control (or to paraphrase you, what's good for the West) the "war on terror" is a propaganda nonsense designed to allow us to carry out actions that would ordinarily be outside the realm of international law and indeed, international law on war and terrorism can now be pretty much defined by the fact that it simply does not apply to the worlds largest nation. 

What for me is the most defining thing about Afghanistan is that whilst we don't under any circumstances want to admit defeat, we also have no idea what victory would look like.

Ah well, big bombs are still sexy right?

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.......and, because nothing despicable has happened for around 18 hours, we're now told the US government under President Obama through the NSA was routinely monitoring and recording financial transactions across the globe by hacking into secure banking systems - following everyone's money around the world in secret.

When the US was caught tapping phones a little while back, one of the things that came out in the enquiry was that a fair bit of the 'national security' information was being fed to US corporations to give them a competitive advantage. If they were doing the same with this information would give those companies a massive (and entirely illegal) leg up, and whilst the NSA has said they only used this to track terrorists and terrorist funding, well, frankly who in their right mind would believe them?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

What for me is the most defining thing about Afghanistan is that whilst we don't under any circumstances want to admit defeat, we also have no idea what victory would look like.

 

And considering British military history there, you have to question the great minds of Whitehall who have planted the British Army right back in the mire.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, maqroll said:

And considering British military history there, you have to question the great minds of Whitehall who have planted the British Army right back in the mire.

I think I see where the problem lies here.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, maqroll said:

And considering British military history there, you have to question the great minds of Whitehall who have planted the British Army right back in the mire.

The Remnants of an Army 1879 by Elizabeth Butler (Lady Butler) 1846-1933The-Union-Jack-in-Afghanistan-The-sole-survivor-of-the-Retreat-from-Kabul.thumb.jpg.f3fb9d7065f717e72cfd3a6b655f8041.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said:

All this bullshit about civilians could of been killed. The only people who would of been in that area were terrorists or people helping terrorists.

Are you an expert on human population dispersion within Achin province?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â