This is where I will talk about the third presidential debate
Wasn’t thrilled with the debate, Trump did better as he hit more strategic questions involving policy.
He showed he us Anti-Assad, Anti-Iran, but at this point, is open to a Russian oriented marriage of convinance in tackling Syria. He also suggested he doesn’t know who on the Arab side to back, thinking any faction can be as bad or worst. In a previous debate, he mentioned talking to “Bibi”, who is the prime minister of Israel.
What would this strategic alliance look like, as far as I can tell?
Assuming a Russian leaning, Israeli leaning, yet anti-Iranian bent, yet his distrust of local factions, Assad remains in place. Does the US & Russia backing or tolerating with grinding teeth Assad maintain the Arab-Turkish Alliance, and does it even assure Assad survives? No on both accounts. ISIS isn’t going to be defeated for decades, nor Al-Nursa. At any point, Assad can crap out, nothing Putin can do can save him once that comes, most Putin can do is back Assad limited in terms of market access via liquid exchange of debt, arms imports, air and naval support. Snipers and assassins don’t worry about those obstacles. Syria via Assad might suppress the opposition, but has to remain a police state. He doesn’t currently have a path fireward for independence in terms of recruits and economy.
Therefor Russia is looking past Assad, while Assad is only looking out for Assad. Russia wants returns on it’s investments. US could obviously give a damn one way or another, as long as the state stomps out ISIS and Al Nursa.
So Russia has to move on priorities neither immediately warranted from a Syrian Addad perspective, or US. Our alliance with Putin will be pickled at best, but can work if you keep this in mind. Generals and advisers close to Trump know this better than me, but I’m not sure if Trump will get this. Perhaps he will given his experience in business negotiations.
Iran is backed by Russia, they provide the infantry support to Assad, and Iran gave Russia Air Space access, in the form of sharing a airbase and in ballistic missiles access through their airspace from the caspain sea. If he has a Anti-Iranian stance, it is going to unsettle the balance of power between US interests (few as they are now given Obama’s train wreck) and Iran, and Iran will pressure Russia back.
Is this a recipe for disaster? Fuck yes, but we’ve helped Iraq liberate Falluja, Ramadi, and now are pushing up riven into Mosul… Iraq uses Iranian backed Shia Militias, who we refuse to back, and the Iraqi Army, who we do. Now, the end result is purely academic, even when your “not backing them” your backing them.
Will this happen in Syria? I don’t know. I don’t know his actual alliance desires. I don’t even know from these three debates if he is backing at least the Kurds, much less the remains of the Euphrates Volcano Alliance. I don’t think Trump much cares for the Arab Alliances at this point, wrote them off. This is going to result in intrigue and hysteria with Qatar, Oman, and Saudi Arabia. Will the Arab League step in and organize the balance of power, or will they turn Machiavellian on one another like in Syria. The 21st century has witnessed the elevation of Proxy Wars not seen since the Cold War, where not just major powers, but small states back militias in brutal fights against one another, while their aircraft fly around next to one another merely waving. We didn’t do that in past proxy wars, airspace was hotly contested. It is a bizarre gentleman’s agreement, one certain to collapse once a state snaps out of it, the concept nearly collapsed when Turkey shot down the Russian Jet.
Overall, I’m highly intolerant of abandoning the Kurds, but at the sane time, they are Sunni- not a high priority for other Arab factions to attack, and Assad tolerates them, and they don’t really need their air space protected from anyone but Turkey, which we never would do, due to Turkey being in NATO. I love the Kurds, hate Erdogan, but even I wouldn’t turn my back on the NATO alliance even if Turkey was in the wrong, not openly at least.
So how do US & Russia have an Alliance when Iran is the odd man out? Through Israel and Turkey. Both are like warm on Russia, prefer Russian tourism and investment, and each other for that matter.
Those two stares share a birder with Syria, and a relation with factions on the ground. Israel is pro Iraqi-Peshmerga Kurd, so this likely translates to pro Syrian Kurd. Thus will likely be a result of negotiations, not to mention the US Military establish silent, to lay off the Kurds.
Turkey is strongly Pro-Turkoman, Turkish populations left in Syria after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. They are very Anti-Kurd, but US has a history with them. I see a conflict arising that Trump may back Erdogan thinking all the pieces fit, while backing Putin, with Putin and Israel and even Assad saying don’t mess with the Kurds, and Iran lukewarm, indifferent to them but not hostile. No easy answers here, Erdogan will do everything he can to make this a decisive issue. I think Trump will eventually back both Kurds and Turkomans, in the north, does this mean the rest or select Arabs will follow? Fuck if I know. Honestly, I can’t penetrate his plan much beyond that. What he is saying about a marriage of convienance makes sense with Russia, Aleppo is done for, countless nations in history have entered into alliances on such basis in the past, and we have no real long term desires out of Syria. It isn’t becoming a NATO candidate anytime soon, it won’t ever be very pro western. It is going to hate us for what Hillary and Obama did to them for centuries, like people hate Hitler and Stalin today. I really don’t know what we hope to get other than a desire to hunt down terrorists and preferably a buffer state or autonomous region to cuddle NATO and the Arab regions. Nothing can benifit Turkey and NATO long term over the next few centuries than having a nice Kurdish buffer zone on NATO’s most volitile border, given Turkey is 1/5 Kurd. NATO would culturally dominate them in time, it something Ergogan can’t see, because it doesn’t benefit him directly politically. I’m not thinking Trump gets this, but it will increasingly dawn on him. He is impulsive, but doesn’t have Obama’s disregard for advisors. I think Trump will take his cabinet more seriously that Obama ever did, will be impressed with his quality Pentagon advisors, who will have to struggle at times to make their points, but can and will get through, and Trump will respect them more for the effort. He is also likely to invest in the best advisors if for no other reason than because he can say he does, it a luxury and status symbol. We designed the office of the chief executive knowing not everyone would be a expert in all fields, put a lot of backups and advisory roles built up over generations. I don’t see Trump taking a sledge hammer to this, or boxing them off into the ignore category like Obama did. I think he might “fire” a few though. Expect media controversy on this, even though Obama did the exact sane thing.
In regards to Hillary- oh fuck. I think she will get further entangled with Euphrates Volcano- I can see scenarios where this can “work” but none without a significant mission creep. Pentagon admitted yesterday to having troops in Mosul “in advisory and support” roles. Look up Greece and early Vietnam to figure out what that means.
We’ve lost a lot of trust in building up from scratch “Free Syrian Army” battalions, that never got above company level in training in Turkey, millions list on shit I can’t comprehend. I literally could of just gone, sat in the bushes on a hillside, training guys, snatching vehicles on planned raids, equipped a company myself minus those millions of dollars. It is essentially what Turkey dies, they send in trainers, hold a position, train them up. We’ve been using Kurdish territory for this reason.
I don’t know how she will navigate that entanglement. Russia isn’t going to “negotiate” anything more with Hillary than with Obama, it isn’t taken seriously, merely a smoke screen. Only thing Russia is respecting is actions, and we don’t act rationally. If we were rational, we would of hit the Syrians just as systematically as Russia has been attacking the Non-ISIS, Non-Al Nursa Arabs, then go back to the negotiation table noting every supply depot between Damascus and Aleppo has been bombed, undoubtedly each one a baby-milk factory, and that the Syrian Army will not be reinforced even by the back roads and will starve, whike select Arab factions get bullet and MRE airdrops, perhaps heavier weapons in the future.
If Russia can’t have Aleppo in Assad’s hands, Putin will destroy Aleppo (which he has since done), but he will react prior to that in upmost dire response to preserving it’s investments, will restrain Assad, until it becomes pointless.
Only time Putin will honestly negotiate is at the very end, when he has won, and wants it finalized.
It is important for the US to sit hack, and recognize Russia doesn’t win in any scenario either, even if every dream in Syria is achieved, it loses. Russia can’t expect to get returns with residual elements lingering in Syria and Iraq for decades, past the contractual promises Assad has made expires. Russian engineers on the ground are high targets, will be for a long time. Will they fortify such locations? Likely, like in Romania, but that is sniper bait, and will be costly. Higher Ugandans? Likely, but they will be corrupt, even more corrupt than Putin is used to.
In order to “win”, whatever that means at this point, preventing a humanitarian tradegy at this point isn’t happening, who damn country is destroyed, you don’t win by being a diplomat first. We are well past that point, it is something the Russians mock and manipulate, worst way to do. You gotta take what they want, threaten it, or outright destroy it.
Informing Putin Assad will be killed if attacks continue is a good path, he knows merely having the intent to do so makes it likely and embolden what is left of the Arab Resistence. Saying a no-gly zone, except for Russians, is a joke. Russians will start flying in Assad’s barrel bomb helicopters as a result. They did it in the Korean War. It was vital it was a secret then, now it would be loudly advertised.
Nothing in Hillary’s plan resolves it, short of her completely losing, and Russia finishes it- or we do go to war with Russia, a extremely high chance of that happening under her plan. How will we get the troops out of Iraq after we start bombing Russian and Iranian and Syrian sites, if Iraq backs Iran? Are our troops going to fight their way to Turkey and Kuwait?
I’m not too thrilled with the variables in what she has said these three speeches. I’m seeing a better scenerio with Trump, but likewise am not too thrilled, I think our Arab Allies across Syria have tonight had s heart attack, and Assad is snickering.
I’m hoping either president, if they do blow it in Syria, has the decentry to do a massive bomb barrage on Syrian Headquarters buildings and Assad’s compounds and houses in a mass merry barrage before they leave. Worst thing we cab do is just leave with him still in power. The state his family built to support his tyranny needs up and blown up if we call it quits. That can done in a weekend, with threats to kill Assad again if we somehow missed, again and again every time he sticks his head up anywhere save in exile. Best off pretending to be dead.
Trump lost.
Hillary is more effective at posturing. She’s a damn straight-faced liar to the bitter end, the country, the world.
Trump has a modified Austrian Economics platform. He isn’t for free trade, but is much better educated- or I should day he leans much more to helping businesses grow and invest by not taxing them to death. Hillary is absolutely wrong in saying there is no proof tax cuts lead to economic growth, we’ve had a long history of proof of this, it is the whole battle between Austrian and Keynesian economics playing out.
However, trump isn’t fully for it, he opposes the Austrian School on Open Borders (they don’t really believe in nationality), and Trump wants a equivelent to Obama Care, but something that is bigly better and works so well. I’m presuming it is Carson’s ideas he will back, obvious he will become a empowered surgeon general in charge of that system. But given these three debates, no clue from the information within them.
So Trump certainly has a lot of evidence lowering taxes helps the economy. Raising them certainly hurts it. These are two certain facts, what is disputable is what kind of economy do you want? Do you want to raise taxes so 1,000,000 workers are fired, businesses close, so you can provide 10,000 overpaid government jobs? Many say yes, they work in DC, one is the administrator of this forum.
But it cones down to jiggling the bottom line of GDP growth compared to job creation, and both political parties only analyze the negative aspects of a presidential administration when the party/ideology they dislike can somehow gave it attributed to them.
A fantastic comeback Trump could of used on Hillary why he us using Chinese steel to build his buildings is quite simply, how foes he know where it comes from, he buys the vlcist affordable materials as any good businessman does, would like to buy US Steel, but can’t anymore because her husband shut down mist if the steel production in the US, despite being outside protesting at that white house, thousands of steel workers begging them to enforce tariff protections akready on the books. He would love to, just can, can’t se we really don’t make it anymore due to Clinton Economics.
He didn’t. He was right to attack NAFTA, but dropped a angle hard to come back from. Was the natural response, he didn’t take it up. Tariffs certainly aren’t Austrian Economics. Hillary sits much closer to them in these areas, she is for Hugh holes in the border, doesn’t want to seal them up completely. She wants to introduce technology (fine) but it is fucking useless without a full wall and coast guard on either flank. She doesn’t appear interested in any sort of reform, just more stagnation, and amnesty.
Leaving holes in the border + amnesty= Open Borders.
She is a absolutely fantastic liar. She essentially said she isn’t for fully Open Boarders, just being a annoying asshole in making everyone walk through desolate shitlands before getting in. It is Open Boarders with a endurance test. That’s fucking mean.
So how, from three three debates, do Trump and Hillary stack out?
Trump is a half Austrian, Hillary is a half Austrian. I think Trump took the healthier half of the ideology though. He is strong on defence and military, he has a healthier and more rational grasp at least openly how economics works, by lowering taxes. This will certainly improve the economy. However, both are still spending. Trump is spending on building a wall, plus immigration border guards, and vastly expanding our legal alien program. We will still have immigrants, just they will be open and legal, not hiding in fear, generally accepted. This leads to a government expansion of the workforce. That 1,000,000 jobs lost in the private sector for taxes to pay for 10,000 government workers still applies. Will the returns in radically reducing crime, increasing taxable employment in mass (100% certainty jobs will be generated in industries like the slaughter houses for example, mostly illegals now, would switch over to legal work forces- we grow our own cattle, NAFTA negotiations or even a collapse would change this market orientation, so economies would see a boost from new jobs opening up, and tax coffers increase suddenly from a rash of employment spontaneously busting out). We would have less drugs on the streets, meaning less arrests, as well as less medical complications. Can this pay for Trump’s Wall?
Likely. Wall is cheap, I have seen walls built for the military, they are modular and portable, and building is Trumps indisputable expertise. Manning is a pain in the ass financially, already is honestly. We can move troops down to permanently patrol, that’s 100 bucks extra in the back per soldier per month, opposed to all Jew boarder agents, and they can get their training in that way, not by adding troops to the military, but rotating what we got on a three month basis. I’ve seen nothing hinted at thus from either Trump or Hillary.
So I presume it will be costly to man and equip, but these are essential skill sets for the national guard, using UAVs, riding convoy, scouting with night optics, command and control operations, Manning the wall. Our current tactical synthesis is built on this, it is wise. Will be costly. Can Trump gain enough benefits, coupled with tax cuts, to make this wall work, getting the economy to grow? I don’t know, only if because Obamacare is imploding. I think that fucking timrbomb that hives guys like Kropotkin a stiffy will sink us, and not even Alexander Hamilton can dissolve it. How do you repeal a spending law that originated outside the origination clause? It was unconstitutional to begin with, immessed in the state level as much as the federal… I don’t think at this point it can be completely removed. If it isn’t, we sink. If it never existed in the first place, we still would be having a Social Security and Medicare panic. I don’t know if either Trump or Hillary can, but Trump us better positioned to start dismantling it, he doesn’t have radicals ob the far left to look at for advice in how to proceed once it cones time to dismantling it like Hillary does. We will be dragged through months of terror in Congress as our currency collapses worst that the pound has, impoverishing everyone, as she moans on about single payer and stories how she met a Mexican American girl in Alberqueque and how the suit she is wearing is white because she stands by women’s rights and wants to higher more teachers, 10,000,000 teachers, in this emergency fix (not replacement) to Obamacare. As she says this, you’ll see stick exchange tickers collapse in response on the news, and all she will respond with is “more bailout”.
Neither has a clear way to solve the Obama “Legacy Debt”, he left thus country three things- ISIS and ObamaCare Debt and a pointless RaceWar. I don’t see any if those three being solved by 2024. ISIS will lose it’s territory, but will remain a terror group. ObamaCare will collapse but will linger in a zombie form, in terms of too many surviving regulations and ticking time bombs nobody will see coming till they kick in, not to mention a scary fucking large debt, reminds me of the movie “The Blob”.
Trump is right to want to immediately week to behead the fucking SOB ASAP, but honestly… It’s a starfish, you cut a starfish up into pieced, each part will grow into a starfish. Our system of Federal Government balanced against state rights will leave it intact in many states not impressed with Trump, and California will sooner default on it’s debt than give it up for any system trump can develop, if for no other reason than spite.
Trump’s economic and defence outlook far more rational, his economics sounder and proven. Hillary is operating in a bizarre manner. Can either pull it off? Trump has the much better chance, I put Hillary at .01% and Trump at 10%, to see results in their presendency.
Long term, long after both die… Trump 90% and Hillary. 01.
Honestly, short of Hillary finding Templar Gold like in the Nicholas Cage movie “National Treasures” we have no chance. Did she say she knew where a highly productive goldmine was? Had the gold in Fort Knox a been making solid gold babies, and we now gotta open up a few more bases to hold it all?
I don’t see a path forward with Hillary. You’ll have a bunch of people standing around in cafe’s, looking like Gib eating scones the first year, saying thank God they didn’t elect Trump. Race Wars won’t stop, Obamacare will be given increasingly dire warnings, mist state exchanges will collapse, and they will shrug and eat their scones and mochas. Last of the arab groups will be killed off in Syria, Iraq will boot us, Turkey will give us increasingly cold shoulders. She will stand with Merkle, both shoeing off their stupid outfits and bad hair, talking diplitalk, nothing being done about Russian subs surfacing off Sweden, taking fishing boats in the Baltic at other times in custody, expansion of violence in Ukraine. We will have a border class, initially few killed. US advisors handed back over to US, a few guys buried with high honors, and they will eat their scones and drink their mocha. A shooting will happen down the street, they will say guns just need banned. They will eat their scones.
One day, they go to buy a scone, lots of parking available. They can’t buy the scone, no money in the bank account. Their bank went bust, FDIC can’t put it back in fast enough, bankers are just fucking gone- their scone friends are crying "arrest those wall street bankers! " but it would be a pointless act. They couldn’t balance the impossibility of the ObamaCare tax legacy. Nobody could, and we kept defaulting on loans, or printed more electronic money, taxing out multiple trillions in loans from other faltering states. International investors will be scared, won’t trust us or them.
The scone eaters lose their apartments, live in their cars for a while. Cars get impounded once they can’t pat for gas. Foodstamps too meagers. The system just won’t work, those fucking politicians just don’t get it.
The people who didn’t get it was the liberal scone eaters. They don’t put organic food in government beef and government cheese. You’ll be living under a overpass dirty, with a yeast infection, scabs on your scalp, toe bleeding, ribs cold and bruise from nothing but a thin blanket.
This happens everyday to someone, those homeless came from somewhere. It is going to snatch a sizeable portion of the liberal bubble- you remember the Dot.Com bubble? We got a Liberal Bubble, a severe knowledge deficient, who thinks being successful is bring a country of lawyers and coders, and other countries make stuff for us while we fuck and abort all out chikdred while smoking weed and decorating our apartments with floral arrangements and bamboo, and everything will be better if we just focus on Women’s Liberation.
What do these people do with their overpaid money, so they can live a sift life if laptop leisure? They invest for returns.
Everyone is fucking doing this, and our whole country is set up to exploit volatility and still expect financial returns. What do you think is going to happen? Everyone will protect their I’ll gotten money while defendingba ideology that goes completely counter to their financial expectations. Nobody, except countries as equally hopeless as us, will swap debylt with us. Not unless we cut up and ship our few remaining factories to them.
It won’t ever get to a full collapse as Joker invisions it, we still have a nationally minded military, they can go without pay like Russians did, so long as they got guarantees of food and shelter. We gave enough reserves for years. We still have elements of the new deal legislation buried in our law, largely inactive, can be ressurected fast- in a year or two we can have a strong farm sector, some if you will be working as fatmhands worst case scenario, or in a rusty factory that had been closed since Bill Clinton’s Administration. Socialism isn’t a system that can fund itself, every socialist state feeds off a external source, the most successful incorporated capitalism into their system. These stopgap measures won’t work forever. The great depression lasted forever because of them, it keeps you alive but miserable, like communism. It isn’t self sufficient.
Eventually, we will have to come to the conclusion that a crazy lady, who has a horrible track record in government, a proven liar, highly corrupt, shouldn’t be in office just because she says she is for women, women issues, wears a white suit, likes babies. That’s the qualification for a midwife, not commander in chief. Trump nir any president now or in the future is “Anti-Woman”, that is some bizarre shit. Abortions aren’t women’s rights, it’s a concern if a civilization balancing the negative impulses towards fear and carelessness that leads to infanticide vs saving both patients life, or how to proceed if only one can survive. The right to abortion us no more a woman’s right than the right to take is a man’s, both a set up on disturbing, unethical premises. If you don’t want a kid, use protection, or don’t fuck at all. The other causes of unwanted birth are certainly up for debate. We shouldn’t derail our entire country, causing millions to suffer inside the US and outside by continuing bad policies, because Hillary wore a white suit to reach out. Women should refuse that reach out and demand to know exactly what she is going to do about far higher priorities, like stopping the economy from cracking, solving her wars that she started, fixing a medical system. Hillary lacks these answers. She gives us a white suit instead, and blathers on how horrified she was that some kid innAleppiwas hurt. No shit, you caused it, it should sear your soul. You’ve offered no viable solution, everything is swirling around the drain you’ve help build, we have absolutely no response form you other than your wearing a white suit and your acqusation Trump bragged about wanting to grab a puss at some point. You know what guts who look like Gib, standing in a cafe with his liberal female friends after work, eating a Scone is thinking? He is thinking about grabbing them all by the puss. Men are perverted, it is in our nature, it is how we think, in terms of international and domestic events, this is very much the wrong time to claim a collective disgust at male behavior, you’ve known since men started hitting on you since puberty that men were this way. How would you feel if Trump did the same thing, came out on stage wearing a Cod Piece, pointing to a shirtless Hasslehoff in the crowd saying he wore this for men’s rights, that men instead of women had the exclusive right to decide abortions, don’t worry about Syria, don’t worry about Iraq, economy, ObamaCare, just focus on his Cod Piece, think about men rights.
That’s what Hillary is essentially doing, and I’m every bit disgusted she only built her campaign around sexual chauvenism, instead of building it around vital presidential concerns. I don’t give a fuck about what pictures of kids in the news, I’ve seen them. I don’t care your failed attempts to humanize yourself and connect to others through antidotal stories- we know your fake as shit, but do you have a viable plan beyond promoting sexism? No? Get off the stage, let Kaine speak, maybe he should be president, he doesn’t go around basing his whole presidential qualification on the symbolism of his outfits. He doesn’t have the multiple felonies you’ve hurdled over. He didn’t defend a rapist and accuse a twelve year old girl of wanting to be raped, lying for a adult MAN who snatched her off her bicycle, left her unconscious for four days, saying she was asking for it.
Anyone at this point but you Hillary. You’ve proven your a liar with no plan. We need a way forward. I got my doubts about Trump, but know certainly now it can never be you.
I hate and despise Clinton however her political scripted or rehearsed sophistry yesterday is better than Trump as deceptive as it is where it looks like she might be the next president just because of that added with an extremely dumb American electorate. Either she wins through an ignorant driven majority American electorate or she rigs the election winning even still.
We that live in the United States are so fucked…
I’ll write more on this later.
Prepare for world war ladies and gentlemen. Remember these three cities for future reference: Aleppo, Mosul, and Ar Raqqah.
Prepare yourselves for total annihilation globally. Game over.
Agreed. Either way, it is going to collapse inward from the Obama years in the next presidential administration, just like it broke under bush from the Clinton era. We keep installing horrific get rich quick, painless and easy pitches to people. Clinton’s era benifited from massive cold war era cuts to the military, and we just delayed the social security issue, with the media interviewing 20 and 30 something years old during a period of economic prosperity that came with ending the cold war (less taxes people) “Oh, we already know Social Security won’t be around when we are old, just fix it for them”.
Now, it is still broken, and the Clinton Era Sub-Prime Loans have blown up. That’s the economic prosperity he brought. One half weakened a absurdly powerful military (absolutely had to happen, insane to keep it at those levels) and the other caused a very toxic bubble to open up. Everyone felt they were middle class in the 90s because it was carefree. Most Clinton had to do was lean back in his chair, scratch his chin and fake being philosophical, saying “Bin Laden blew up our embassies in Africa, wind a dinky middle or two.” In Kosovo, again… “Hmmm, Americans don’t want boots on the ground, reminds them of Vietnam, air power only”.
In Kosovo, we only “won” because the Serbs were pussies and said fuck it. We blew up 17 or 23 tanks total, our missles tended to bounce off because we didn’t have advanced armor penetrating capacity, and russian tanks curved just right for it to happen. So instead we blew up bridges, and this demoralized them enough to say fuck it.
We use the exact same policy under Obama. No ground forces, droids and missiles. It’s taken years to convince Obama to use Delta Force and Special Forces, Rangers should be used too. Select volunteer airborne and marine companies of young, single men, no married guys, going in on larger boom-boom raids. It’s cheaper than multi million dollar missiles daily, and we would get a lot more human intelligence.
There is a book everyone should read, but the second in command of Desert Storm, a logistics general:
He ran the logistics of the Persian Gulf War. Reason we didn’t want to stay in Iraq under the original Bush was because this general said he didn’t want to replicate the large Fire Bases of Vietnam. They were constant targets, ate up manpower to run. Powell envisioned it as a short war, to repel the invasion of Iraq into Saudi Arabia (we were defending the border during desert shield till Saddam invaded Saudi Arabia, people forget he attacked us first, we were still negotiating). Push into Kuwait, if the ultimatum wasn’t accepted, then push into Iraq to fuck them up badly enough not to want to try again, then get out.
We really went wrong with the sanctions, embargo. It made Saddam militant and pissed, he stuck to chemical weapons rhetoric out of spite.
In Syria, we can use limited warfare, similar to British WW2 Desert Jeep Commandos, who would ride up, mortar a base, scatter, hit it again, flee. We don’t need a base, it we do, it should be no bigger than a Walmart on allied land, two watch towers Max, easily disposable, just enough to rest in and sleep.
We went all out in Iraq with massive firebases. We couldn’t tell the difference between Saddam Loyalists anymore and Terrorists, because they merged. It only happened because we kept the embargo forever, instead of seeking peace. Short wars shouldn’t lead to eternal enmity. We were idiots, let it happen, a horrific humanitarian disaster unfolded under Saddam. We can’t just point a finger at Saddam the Tyrant and blame him, we were part of the problem. Bill Clinton waxing philosophical about bombing a anti aircraft position per attack he launched in the no fly zones was absurd. Either make peace or kill the guy, don’t put the byrdon on the common man. They starved. Their children were born deformed, I saw it. Inbreeding was a big cause, but lack of medicine hurt many too. People had simple injuries like joints out of their sockets, easy to fix. In Iraq, economy imploded. No medical supplies, they turned serverly lame, deformed.
Roving commandos are smart. I wouldn’t put a firebase anywhere that isn’t Kurdish. We have them in Iraq in the north, kurds are not Anti-American nir stupid.
If we don’t plan on occupying a state, then fast raids, both air and ground is needed. I’m not saying send in 3rd Infantry Division, I’m saying highly specialized guys, with volunteers from select Airborne and Marines. They exist only to kill, and some killing needs done. We aren’t going to sign a peace treaty with Al Nursa or ISIS, we just need to fuck them up. That is much cheaper than a purely aitwar, had we done that to begin with, this war would of ended over a year ago.
Bill Clinton’s Air Only campaign survives till now. It was a bad idea then, bad idea now. How long will we keep Syria under Sanctions? Our military is joint arms, which means both sir, land, and sea works together, everyone watching and supporting one another. You don’t need a massive army for these kinds if wars, small nimble ones work best. It cuts down on civilian attacks because the opposition retracts in general, fortifying and laying low. They need strength in numbers to repel advance thrusts. Less troops running around means less massacres, less taxes collected, less troops to conscript. They control less and less, you deny them more and more.
If you hate the assassin drone policies, know it is a direct evolution of Clinton’s outlook. Limited warfare is better in cases you don’t desire to occupy. You can be less picky about allies in such cases. Putin and Assad knows we don’t want to make Syria the 51st State and send colonist. Limited, yet combined arms attacks are a far wiser and more humane option. Think of it as deep penetrating Calvary raids in ancient warfare, it could fuck shit up with a minimum of force.
That would be a semi competent plan, Pentagon unboubtly can do better. No Boots On The Ground is idiotic and disturbing, everytime we do this a genocide results because all we do is buzz around in the air, most guts know they don’t realistic have much to fear from that.
Mosul isn’t going bad so far.
I went searching on Pravda, given Hillary’s extreme emphasis on Russia. I couldn’t find anything direct yet. Pravda has never been a reliable news corportstion, during the Soviet era they were the MSNBC or CNN of the Soviet Union, akin to The People’s Daily in China. They spin what the government wants heard. Sometimes, a situation is so fucked up they don’t spin it, fits just fine as the honest truth. This is the semi-officisl stance of Russia right now:
It is really bad when even Russia is getting the situation better than many on the left, of the crisis we are approaching. Hillary represents democracy in full decay. Unfortunately, a trait of a republic is the tendency to slog through this decay for centuries.
Anyone who doesn’t vote for Jill Stein is an idiot, garbage, and all that is wrong with this world.
foxnews.com/world/2016/10/20 … orces.html
Yes Hillary, we will negotiate, in your white suit, ironing these difficulties out with the various sides, installing a no-fly zone. There isn’t a faction except Assad strangely enough in Syria that isn’t facing airstrikes. A no fly zone is meaningless if all the allies want to kill each others allies desperately.
I say just take the whole Kurdish population to the US, and give their land to the refugees, be done with it.
Watching the US Election Gala Dinner… I found Trump funnier than Clinton, but she’s not through yet… will she deliver?
Hillary’s posturing seems to have been insufficient to sway those that have been growing doubts. I thought Trump looked like a frog, and did stupid things like saying ‘such a nasty woman’ while she was speaking - and yet her final statement sucked extremely bad, and his final was solid.
Its still up for grabs. And I think the truth is leaking in. Independents lean to Trump with 70 percent in some polls. Trumps candidacy is internet based really, a meme, and because of this he is less able to be untruthful, systemic. His lies and vices are entirely transparent.
I wonder mr Reasonable, what is it specifically in Trump that you find humiliating for the country?
Many of my friends feel the same way. They are still not voting for Clinton, and perhaps even for Trump for practical purposes, but they cant stomach him. I find Bush jr infinitely more humiliating for the US, namely absolutely debasing. After him Obama could have saved a little bit but didn’t.
Is Trumps crassness worse to palate than Bushes absent minded retardation of the concept Liberty? I dont think so, I prefer sharpness to silliness for world leaders - Bush just stood there, grinning, as all the prestige of the US was flushed down the drain - was that not embarrassing?
If there’s something weird
and it don’t look good
He’s not self made. Big part of the culture that most people want to see here is that it be deemed unacceptable to be racist and sexist and an exploiter of the poor or the system. He’s brazenly all those things and the fear is that people on the outside looking in might think he actually represents more of us than he actually does. There’s something to be said for manners, and he has none.
