U.S. Politics

[Awol]

7 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Agreed,  I don't think there is anything in the Russia thing at all to be honest. It comes across as a reach by the media where they are looking up their own arse.  The U.S is worried about China.  Putin is going to stick his fingers into something very unsavory at some point that takes his **** arm off.  He has made himself look a right tit to be fair and his choice of "Chemical using friends" is higher than most world leaders,  well done.  Add to this, bombs going of in Russian cities/subway's that Putin is actually visiting at the time all in the same week.  Not the best tactical move by Putin and not such the invincible little imbecile he thinks he is. What's he gonna do now,  smash up a bus stop and beat up a cat whilst topless the word removed.

I've had many chemical using friends over the years and they were mostly very sociable.

On the Putin piece I think you're absolutely right and this on Twitter made me chuckle earlier:

Vladimir Putin joins the long line of investors who got screwed by Donald Trump. 

[StefanAVFC]

37 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Agreed,  I don't think there is anything in the Russia thing at all to be honest. It comes across as a reach by the media where they are looking up their own arse

If there's nothing in it, why has everyone close to Trump lied about it? Why did Flynn resign over it? Why has Nunes recused himself?

I think some of his campaign have ties to Russia, but it won't be enough to pin him down, especially with a GOP congress.

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said:

I think some of his campaign have ties to Russia, but it won't be enough to pin him down, especially with a GOP congress.

I think the chance has gone,  it was when it was in the news or never at all,  it's all moved on i think ?

[StefanAVFC]

3 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

I think the chance has gone,  it was when it was in the news or never at all,  it's all moved on i think ?

Are you joking?

There were 3 big stories just this week. DeVos' brother setting up back channel in Seychelles, Kushner meeting the head of a sanctioned bank and not disclosing it in his security clearance and Nunes recusing himself. Plus Yates being stopped from testifying about it.

Also the FBI have confirmed they're investigating as well as a bi-partisan Senate committee. Unless they're both just looking up their own arse as well.

Edited April 7, 2017 by StefanAVFC

[TheAuthority]

 

[villakram]

Congress now pretty much united behind Trump. Must protect the babies... from whom though?

And the amount of god this and god that in his presser last night 

Edited April 7, 2017 by villakram

[maqroll]

6 hours ago, blandy said:

That doesn't look decisive to me.

Exactly, three days ago, the official WH position was hands off Syria. Trump loves to watch TV. Trump saw the terrible images. Trump bombs Syria. Rinse and repeat whenever and wherever His Orangeness feels like it.

[Awol]

2 hours ago, maqroll said:

Exactly, three days ago, the official WH position was hands off Syria. Trump loves to watch TV. Trump saw the terrible images. Trump bombs Syria. Rinse and repeat whenever and wherever His Orangeness feels like it.

The red line issue of 2013 arguably led to a whole host of 2nd and 3rd order effects, not least the Russian annexation of Crimea.

Obama's inaction then demonstrated that a country or leader could act against western (US) interests with impunity. The US national security establishment has been itching to put that right ever since and has now done so,courtesy of Assad - or more likely a senior SAA commander acting on his own initiative.

I think that for once this had very little to do with Trump's TV watching habits. 

 

[Chindie]

Supposedly jets were leaving the very same airfield earlier.

[TrentVilla]

1 hour ago, Chindie said:

Supposedly jets were leaving the very same airfield earlier.

They didn't target the runway so hardly surprising.

[Chindie]

2 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

They didn't target the runway so hardly surprising.

I didn't say it was surprising.

It highlights what this action was. Posturing. It's actual effect was negligible.

[TrentVilla]

4 minutes ago, Chindie said:

I didn't say it was surprising.

It highlights what this action was. Posturing. It's actual effect was negligible.

I didn't say you did....

[LondonLax]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

The red line issue of 2013 arguably led to a whole host of 2nd and 3rd order effects, not least the Russian annexation of Crimea.

Obama's inaction then demonstrated that a country or leader could act against western (US) interests with impunity. The US national security establishment has been itching to put that right ever since and has now done so,courtesy of Assad - or more likely a senior SAA commander acting on his own initiative.

I think that for once this had very little to do with Trump's TV watching habits. 

 

When you call it "Obama's" inaction, didn't Obama want to retailiate but went via the proper channels and got voted down by congress? The inaction back then was in the Republican congress (Cheered on by Trump also telling them to vote down any kind of retaliation). 

It is pretty rediculous for Trump to now criticize Obama for not attacking Syria.

Edited April 7, 2017 by LondonLax

[Straggler]

Over the last 5 years ten's of thousands of children have been killed in Syria. Enough to fill villa park to capacity. These kids have been shot, bombed, arrested, tortured and murdered, each death a tragedy. Until the gas attack Trump had treated those children as potential terrorists and a threat to the USA. He had cut international aid, slammed the door on refugees and advocated against any action in Syria.

Trumps executive orders directly lead to more children being in harms way. Bombing an airport does nothing to change that. Launching a bunch of missiles is just the military getting a hardon for firing off some of that expensive hardware they have and Trump gets to posture like the tough guy he wants to be.

Back it up with a humanitarian effort to actually save a human life and I may soften my view, but I will bet a pound to your penny that the ban on Syrian refugees remains a part of trumps Muslim ban.

[Awol]

11 hours ago, LondonLax said:

When you call it "Obama's" inaction, didn't Obama want to retailiate but went via the proper channels and got voted down by congress? The inaction back then was in the Republican congress (Cheered on by Trump also telling them to vote down any kind of retaliation). 

It is pretty rediculous for Trump to now criticize Obama for not attacking Syria.

IR 101: Don't make threats and fail to back them up if your bluff is called. 

Obama didn't need Congress, it wasn't a declaration of war it was a military response to a "red line" he had freely drawn regarding the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

Whether you agreed with his climb down or not there's no doubt that following it America's main geopolitical rivals took it as weakness and acted to advance their own objectives - Russia in Crimea/Eastern Ukraine, China in the South China Sea, Iran and Hezbollah in Syria etc.

The criticism Trump is making of Obama has been mainstream in Western FP and Security discourse for years.

[Awol]

11 hours ago, Chindie said:

I didn't say it was surprising.

It highlights what this action was. Posturing. It's actual effect was negligible.

More of a warning than posturing, I don't think they'd hesitate to launch a more serious assault if chemicals are used again.

The point is neither Assad or Putin (or other potential adversaries) now knows for sure either, so have lost their certainty around escalation dominance - crudely the belief that the other guy doesn't have the balls to respond to your own actions or at least he believes that you are prepared to go further.

That means next time they are more likely to think again before wiping their arses on the Geneva Convention. 

Reassuringly well played by Washington, imo. 

Edited April 8, 2017 by Awol

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

That means next time they are more likely to think again before wiping their arses on the Geneva Convention. 

Doesn't the Trump attack break the Geneva convention as a hostile military act by a single state without a declaration of war and without the backing international organisations? 

If it had been anyone but the US we'd be using the description 'rogue state'. There is no mandate for the US to unilaterally decide on the application of international law. 

 

[Chindie]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

More of a warning than posturing, I don't think they'd hesitate to launch a more serious assault if chemicals are used again.

The point is neither Assad or Putin (or other potential adversaries) now knows for sure either, so have lost their certainty around escalation dominance - crudely the belief that the other guy doesn't have the balls to respond to your own actions or at least he believes that you are prepared to go further.

That means next time they are more likely to think again before wiping their arses on the Geneva Convention. 

Reassuringly well played by Washington, imo. 

I'd agree with this if this wasn't Syria (and if this US regime didn't have Russian love bites all over it to a lesser extent).

For the theory to work Assad and Putin need to believe the US will go to the nth degree, that they will intervene in Syria and 'fix' it. They both know the US won't do this. Syria is too much of a hot potato, it's too intertwined with Russia and Russian interests for the US to do anything of consequence. The US isn't going to seriously provoke Russia over Syria. At most we get more of this. Syria takes a minor hit, everyone else postures, repeat. Syrians keep dying, spared perhaps dying choking spasming with their bodily functions failing, but perfectly able to die in explosions and to gunshot wounds.

As said. Posturing.

 

[HanoiVillan]

2 hours ago, Awol said:

IR 101: Don't make threats and fail to back them up if your bluff is called. 

Obama didn't need Congress, it wasn't a declaration of war it was a military response to a "red line" he had freely drawn regarding the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

Whether you agreed with his climb down or not there's no doubt that following it America's main geopolitical rivals took it as weakness and acted to advance their own objectives - Russia in Crimea/Eastern Ukraine, China in the South China Sea, Iran and Hezbollah in Syria etc.

The criticism Trump is making of Obama has been mainstream in Western FP and Security discourse for years.

Obama absolutely should have gone to Congress, which (on this occasion, and not on several others, which is to his shame) he did. Launching missiles at a sovereign nation (ie, Trump's actions this week) is an act of war, which should have received both UN and congressional approval, as acts of war should do. 

[LondonLax]

The rule of law doesn't seem to matter when you feel righteous.