Advertisement

WAR!!!

This is the main board on The Outhouse, where Outhousers talk about everything. No topics are off limits, and it doesn't have to be about comics. All the topics from the other boards also show up in The Asylum, so you never have to leave1

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Logged in users see WAY LESS ADS, so why not register? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

Eli Katz
User avatar
OMCTO
 
Posts: 10818
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 14 posts
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:44 pm
Title: Avatar Winner, Apr 2012


Re: WAR!!!

Postby Eli Katz » Fri Aug 30, 2013 9:36 pm

Clinton bombing Serbian troops was vital in saving Kosovo from slaughter and ethnic cleansing. Aerial strikes can be effective--very effective.--for humanitarian missions.

I'm not sure whether they will be in this case. I don't know enough about the targets, the Syria regime, its military capacity, and so on.

But a bombing mission is much different from the invasion in Iraq. The two shouldn't be compared.

Advertisement

Frag
User avatar
REAL OFFICIAL President of the Outhouse
 
Posts: 35926
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 10 posts
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:25 pm
Title: Mama don't like tattletales.
Formerly: Frag It, Rusty Kuntz


Re: WAR!!!

Postby Frag » Fri Aug 30, 2013 10:41 pm

Eli Katz is smart.
Jude Terror wrote:I'll vote for NPWFBH in the next election.


Outhouse Post #1,000,000:

Frag It wrote::smt117


Image

achilles
User avatar
Humuhumunukunukuapuaa
 
Posts: 10427
Likes: 18 posts
Liked in: 8 posts
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:45 pm
Title: Much Eviler Than GOSD!


Re: WAR!!!

Postby achilles » Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:05 pm

pastajoe wrote:
Except that you start with a false premise. Economy has improved under Obama; stock market up, housing up, manufacturing up, exports up, unemployment down, and all this despite the do-nothing Republicans trying to block his efforts. If anything, Obama has been overly cautious to avoid the mistakes of Iraq.


Yeah, real improved. Gas prices doubled. All the "jobs" he "created or saved" are part time so as to avoid Obamacare...

Hell, even Code Pink said the reason you don't see them protesting Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner's wars are because the economy was so much better under Bush, enabling them to travel and protest.

Meanwhile the reported reason behind this whole thing according to Pentagon insiders is that Obama doesn't want to be mocked, evidently. He wants to do a strike that just muscular enough so that people don't think it's a Clinton aspirin factory missile attack, but not enough so that it actually does anything.

In other words, it's an ego thing with him.
Achilles is the kind of evil that hollows out a volcano for a lair, and sends killer robots after his enemies.---Lord Simian

achilles
User avatar
Humuhumunukunukuapuaa
 
Posts: 10427
Likes: 18 posts
Liked in: 8 posts
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:45 pm
Title: Much Eviler Than GOSD!


Re: WAR!!!

Postby achilles » Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:11 pm

Eli Katz wrote:Clinton bombing Serbian troops was vital in saving Kosovo from slaughter and ethnic cleansing. Aerial strikes can be effective--very effective.--for humanitarian missions.

I'm not sure whether they will be in this case. I don't know enough about the targets, the Syria regime, its military capacity, and so on.

But a bombing mission is much different from the invasion in Iraq. The two shouldn't be compared.


Actually, they should be compared, but not for that reason. They should be compared because of unintended consequences. Bomb them too much, and you get Assad out of there, which in one sense is a good thing, since he's a murderous thug. However, the rebels are largely even more murderous thugs from Al Qaeda, who would represent an even more immediate threat to the US. Since Syria as it stands doesn't threaten us at all.

An even more immediate comparison was Obama's leading from behind in Libya, where we also had no pressing national security interests, but he wanted a war of his own anyway. But one he could fight from 30,000 feet. We know where that got us, a dead ambassador for the first time since Carter, and other dead Americans, a scandal, and thousands of heavy weapons including Stingers dispersed to who knows where, (Syria and AQ being one good bet).

Obama has no plan, no idea even of what he wants to do, and no idea of what he'd be setting loose.
Achilles is the kind of evil that hollows out a volcano for a lair, and sends killer robots after his enemies.---Lord Simian

achilles
User avatar
Humuhumunukunukuapuaa
 
Posts: 10427
Likes: 18 posts
Liked in: 8 posts
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:45 pm
Title: Much Eviler Than GOSD!


Re: WAR!!!

Postby achilles » Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:18 pm

Herald wrote:
They've repeatedly demonstrated that they'll do ANYthing as long as it goes against Obama. Even if it means destroying this country financially. It's patently absurd. :roll:


I might point out that Obama and his party are the ones who want to spend like drunken sailors without ever considering tomorrow. And the ones who oppose domestic energy sources if they aren't fairy farts and unicorn piss. And the ones who put up Obamacare, which well not a totally bad idea was implemented in such a way that even Obama is admitting it's a total loser that can't be implemented.

The Republican suck for many reasons, including some financial ones, but they aren't the ones in power. They haven't presided over this lovely economy the last five years.

And the Republicans BTW largely cave to Obama on everything he wants in the end. So they're not really sacrificing anything. Nor are they obligated to just give him what he wants on the grounds that "they" are the ones endangering the country. After all, it takes two to play that game. Obama and the Dems could have backed down at any time as well, but they never did.
Achilles is the kind of evil that hollows out a volcano for a lair, and sends killer robots after his enemies.---Lord Simian

David Bird
User avatar
phrase IV
 
Posts: 5801
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:28 pm
Location: Victoria, BC


Re: WAR!!!

Postby David Bird » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:59 am

If I wasn't already deeply skeptical about this whole thing, where on earth did they get such a precise number of casualties?

Eli Katz
User avatar
OMCTO
 
Posts: 10818
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 14 posts
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:44 pm
Title: Avatar Winner, Apr 2012


Re: WAR!!!

Postby Eli Katz » Sat Aug 31, 2013 1:11 am

achilles wrote:
Actually, they should be compared, but not for that reason. They should be compared because of unintended consequences. Bomb them too much, and you get Assad out of there, which in one sense is a good thing, since he's a murderous thug. However, the rebels are largely even more murderous thugs from Al Qaeda, who would represent an even more immediate threat to the US. Since Syria as it stands doesn't threaten us at all.

An even more immediate comparison was Obama's leading from behind in Libya, where we also had no pressing national security interests, but he wanted a war of his own anyway. But one he could fight from 30,000 feet. We know where that got us, a dead ambassador for the first time since Carter, and other dead Americans, a scandal, and thousands of heavy weapons including Stingers dispersed to who knows where, (Syria and AQ being one good bet).

Obama has no plan, no idea even of what he wants to do, and no idea of what he'd be setting loose.


There may be a security interest in punishing the Assad regime for using chemical weapons. As far as I know, no government leader has used them since Saddam did in the late 1980s against the Kurds. People have been talking about the establishment of a chemical weapons taboo for the last 25 years. Beyond immediate humanitarian concerns (which are important), it may be wise to rebuke Assad for breaking the taboo. That way, we discourage other countries from using them or supplying them to terrorist groups.

As for Obama lacking a plan, that's a silly point. I'm sure the Pentagon has provided him with multiple strategies. It always does. The generals war game everything. It's up to the president to determine which is the best strategy.

This case, I think, is very similar to Libya: there's a humanitarian crisis that the world is watching. The U.S. loses credibility as it sits on the sidelines and allows tens of thousands of civilians to die. But it risks making the situation worse by intervening. Islamist groups could gain control and turn Syria into a terrorist stronghold. People in the region may interpret the intervention not as a humanitarian mission but as an imperial project. No doubt, local governments will spin it as such to foster deeper resentment against the U.S. Or possibly, military strikes by the U.S. could make the Assad regime even more desperate, encouraging it to increase rather than cease its use of chemical weapons.

The Syrian situation is without good options, I think. So Obama will ultimately make the "wrong" choice, but only because there are no "right" choices. So the question may be whether he makes the least bad choice. And because I don't know enough about Syria, I'm not sure what the least bad choice is.
Last edited by Eli Katz on Sat Aug 31, 2013 1:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

Eli Katz
User avatar
OMCTO
 
Posts: 10818
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 14 posts
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:44 pm
Title: Avatar Winner, Apr 2012


Re: WAR!!!

Postby Eli Katz » Sat Aug 31, 2013 1:12 am

ReturnoftheMack wrote:Eli Katz is smart.

You make me blush. :oops:

Spektre
User avatar
Motherfucker from Hell
 
Posts: 2484
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 3 posts
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:14 am


Re: WAR!!!

Postby Spektre » Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:27 am

pastajoe wrote:
Except that you start with a false premise. Economy has improved under Obama; stock market up, housing up, manufacturing up, exports up, unemployment down, and all this despite the do-nothing Republicans trying to block his efforts. If anything, Obama has been overly cautious to avoid the mistakes of Iraq.


You are kidding right. I can make my own personal finances look great if I do not count the huge loans I take to finance the "growth". For the first time ever, our debt exceeds our GDP and by the end of his 2nd term President Obama will have borrowed more than all previous presidents combined. Even if you ignore the constitutional assaults, he is he most economically damaging president we have had in my lifetime.
- Continuity is or it is not. There is no such thing as soft continuity.
- A character IS his continuity.
- Continuity is consistency of the characteristics of people, plot, objects, and places seen by the reader or viewer.

Spektre
User avatar
Motherfucker from Hell
 
Posts: 2484
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 3 posts
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:14 am


Re: WAR!!!

Postby Spektre » Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:29 am

Herald wrote:
They've repeatedly demonstrated that they'll do ANYthing as long as it goes against Obama. Even if it means destroying this country financially. It's patently absurd. :roll:


Going against Obama is nearly mutually exclusive with destroying the country financially.
- Continuity is or it is not. There is no such thing as soft continuity.
- A character IS his continuity.
- Continuity is consistency of the characteristics of people, plot, objects, and places seen by the reader or viewer.

Spektre
User avatar
Motherfucker from Hell
 
Posts: 2484
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 3 posts
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:14 am


Re: WAR!!!

Postby Spektre » Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:33 am

Eli Katz wrote:Clinton bombing Serbian troops was vital in saving Kosovo from slaughter and ethnic cleansing. Aerial strikes can be effective--very effective.--for humanitarian missions.

I'm not sure whether they will be in this case. I don't know enough about the targets, the Syria regime, its military capacity, and so on.

But a bombing mission is much different from the invasion in Iraq. The two shouldn't be compared.


Agreed as with all military force undertaken by Obama since he took office.

On the one hand you had a president who, while still not constitutionally sound, did go to Congress for approval and on the other hand someone who personally maintains a kill list and decides to send in bombs to make sure an ill thought out remark does not make him look foolish.
Last edited by Spektre on Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Continuity is or it is not. There is no such thing as soft continuity.
- A character IS his continuity.
- Continuity is consistency of the characteristics of people, plot, objects, and places seen by the reader or viewer.

Spektre
User avatar
Motherfucker from Hell
 
Posts: 2484
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 3 posts
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:14 am


Re: WAR!!!

Postby Spektre » Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:37 am

Eli Katz wrote:
There may be a security interest in punishing the Assad regime for using chemical weapons. As far as I know, no government leader has used them since Saddam did in the late 1980s against the Kurds. People have been talking about the establishment of a chemical weapons taboo for the last 25 years. Beyond immediate humanitarian concerns (which are important), it may be wise to rebuke Assad for breaking the taboo. That way, we discourage other countries from using them or supplying them to terrorist groups.

As for Obama lacking a plan, that's a silly point. I'm sure the Pentagon has provided him with multiple strategies. It always does. The generals war game everything. It's up to the president to determine which is the best strategy.

This case, I think, is very similar to Libya: there's a humanitarian crisis that the world is watching. The U.S. loses credibility as it sits on the sidelines and allows tens of thousands of civilians to die. But it risks making the situation worse by intervening. Islamist groups could gain control and turn Syria into a terrorist stronghold. People in the region may interpret the intervention not as a humanitarian mission but as an imperial project. No doubt, local governments will spin it as such to foster deeper resentment against the U.S. Or possibly, military strikes by the U.S. could make the Assad regime even more desperate, encouraging it to increase rather than cease its use of chemical weapons.

The Syrian situation is without good options, I think. So Obama will ultimately make the "wrong" choice, but only because there are no "right" choices. So the question may be whether he makes the least bad choice. And because I don't know enough about Syria, I'm not sure what the least bad choice is.


Nonetheless I am sure he will take credit for lives "created and/or saved." Attacking Syria is not in our national security interest. Getting involved in a civil war IS imperialist.
- Continuity is or it is not. There is no such thing as soft continuity.
- A character IS his continuity.
- Continuity is consistency of the characteristics of people, plot, objects, and places seen by the reader or viewer.

S.F. Jude Terror
User avatar
OMCTO
 
Posts: 74760
Likes: 96 posts
Liked in: 81 posts
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:44 pm
Location: Up Your Ass
Title: Webmaster Supreme
Formerly: Dr. Jude Terror


Re: WAR!!!

Postby S.F. Jude Terror » Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:46 am

Spektre wrote:
You are kidding right. I can make my own personal finances look great if I do not count the huge loans I take to finance the "growth". For the first time ever, our debt exceeds our GDP and by the end of his 2nd term President Obama will have borrowed more than all previous presidents combined. Even if you ignore the constitutional assaults, he is he most economically damaging president we have had in my lifetime.


Except that American debt is never meant to actually be paid back. All of the countries that own US treasury bonds know damn well that they can never cash them in, which makes the money effectively tribute, just like the uneven flow of imports into our country. America's chief export is military might, and in the end that's all that really matters and what this whole thing is really about. The US can't afford for its chief export to be devalued by perceived weakness.
Image
I LOVE BLUD BLOOD! - Rob Liefeld

S.F. Jude Terror
User avatar
OMCTO
 
Posts: 74760
Likes: 96 posts
Liked in: 81 posts
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:44 pm
Location: Up Your Ass
Title: Webmaster Supreme
Formerly: Dr. Jude Terror


Re: WAR!!!

Postby S.F. Jude Terror » Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:53 am

And when we borrow "money" from the Fed, that's not even real money. It's created at that instant for the sole purpose of lending it to the US. It's not like there's some enormous cache of gold or something backing up all that debt. It's fictional, and everybody pretends they can see and touch it because bombs.
Image
I LOVE BLUD BLOOD! - Rob Liefeld

David Bird
User avatar
phrase IV
 
Posts: 5801
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:28 pm
Location: Victoria, BC


Re: WAR!!!

Postby David Bird » Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:40 am

Eli Katz wrote:
As far as I know, no government leader has used them since Saddam did in the late 1980s against the Kurds.


And he had help.

leave a comment with facebook

PreviousNext

Return to The Asylum



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 59 guests

Advertisement