If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Shhhhhh. Don't tell anyone   (reuters.com) divider line 332
    More: Obvious, Syrians, Free Syrian Army, clandestine operations, Qatari, United Nations Security Council, Syrian opposition, Assad, Damascus  
•       •       •

12103 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Aug 2012 at 12:26 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



332 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-02 09:08:43 AM  

unexplained bacon: beta_plus: I'm glad Obama is keeping us out of wars that are not in our interest, just like he promised in 2008.

Go Hopey McChange!

your comment would make sense if Obama was putting troops in Syria for regime change.
but he's not, and I'm glad.

aid to native rebels, and tactical drone strikes are a much better way to handle our troubles in the ME than full on government take overs wouldn't you say?

go ahead guy, tell us all what Obama should be doing...




*raises hand*
I'm going to go with "stop being a black muslim usurper" as his answer.
 
2012-08-02 09:10:43 AM  

MugzyBrown: I was in favor of invading Iraq...




MugzyBrown: I voted for Bush in '00...


www.lifeclever.com

3 out of 4 doctors recommend taking one (1) grain of salt prior to reading a MugzyBrown post.
 
2012-08-02 09:11:51 AM  

MugzyBrown: Then please explain the difference between the US putting troops on the ground with rebels to kill pro Assad forces and using a drone as CAS for rebels to kill pro Assad forces and using a spy satelite to tell rebels how to kill pro Assad forces.

They are all acts of war against pro Assad forces.


It would probably be worth identifying where in the article it says we are doing any of those things first.
 
2012-08-02 09:12:22 AM  

Deneb81: Not entirely against providing the rebels TD same kind of intel tools the Russians have been supplying Assad with for years though.


Bring back the cold war!
 
2012-08-02 09:13:54 AM  

MugzyBrown: I seriously want to know, were you in favor of invading Iraq?

I bet you were, and if so that would make your comments now look like complete partisan hackery of the highest order...and I'd be soooo surprised.

I was in favor of invading Iraq and now realise it was stupid. There are differences here. At least we were sold our involvement was security threat to the US via chemical weapons and possible terrorism links. That was obviously fabricated, exagerated, and/or misinterpreted, depending who you ask. I voted for Bush in '00 but not in '04.

I am willing to admit something I supported was wrong. I'm sure you're willing to admit that if McCain were in office today involving us in Lybia and Syria you'd be yelling about PNAC and such.


and I say you'd be for this aid to the rebels (different than an invasion, very important point you seem to have problems with) if McCain were President.

I've always thought that invasion/occupation in the ME (or elsewhere for that matter) was a bad idea, and I've always thought that tactical strikes and aid to local rebels was the better tactic. I promise you if Obama was trying to put troops into Syria to overthrow the regime, occupy the country, and rebuild it as a democracy I'd be pissed as hell.

You act as though you learned something, I think that's BS. I think you're new found common sense is nothing but partisan BS. Illustrated by the fact that you're pretending invasion/occupation is the same as clandestine aid. You can pretend but I see what you're doing.
 
2012-08-02 09:16:42 AM  

Deneb81: randomjsa: Oh wait you mean they might actually win? Obama can now swoop in to offer them support so he can once again take credit for something he doesn't deserve.

It's not clear they'll win now. Do you believe it was MORE clear months ago when the order was signed? Or that American CIA assistance mad the rebels LESS likely to succeed?


Don't expect this dipshiat to show his work.
 
2012-08-02 09:17:31 AM  

TappingTheVein: [www.titaniumteddybear.net image 611x304]

It never ceases to amaze me how the West has no farking clue about Middle-Eastern mentality.


Half those Muj were assassinated by the Taliban......on 9/10/01...because they were allied with the US.


/themoreyouknow
//ignoranceisbliss
 
2012-08-02 09:18:32 AM  
The power structure sure likes to flip Al Queda.
 
2012-08-02 09:19:22 AM  

MugzyBrown: Then please explain the difference between the US putting troops on the ground with rebels to kill pro Assad forces and using a drone as CAS for rebels to kill pro Assad forces and using a spy satelite to tell rebels how to kill pro Assad forces.

From the War Powers Resolution:

(a) Written report; time of submission; circumstances necessitating submission; information reported
In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced-

(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation;
the President shall [bla bla congressional notification, 60 day requirement, etc]

Later:

For purposes of this chapter, the term "introduction of United States Armed Forces" includes the assignment of members of such armed forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in hostilities.

The satellites could be considered not assisting if they were simply providing information (like detailed maps and troop reports) rather than acting as a C&C method.

 
2012-08-02 09:20:18 AM  
sprawl15:

sigh @ eaten italics tags
 
2012-08-02 09:20:37 AM  

unexplained bacon: I think you're new found common sense is nothing but partisan BS. Illustrated by the fact that you're pretending invasion/occupation is the same as clandestine aid. You can pretend but I see what you're doing.


I'm not a partisan, never have been. I've never given money or support to an GOP or DNC campaign. As an example, in 2000 when I voted for GW Bush, I also voted for Rob Andrews on the same ticket. So you can think whatever you want about me, but if you wish to portray me as a GOP flag waiver, you'd be wrong. If I had only the choice of voting for Obama or Romney, I'd vote for Obama.

With that said, invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force.

If we invaded and were repelled by Assad or provided only aid to the rebels and the rebels lose.. I think Assad would have the same opinion of the US.

Same thing if the rebels win, but are overthrown by a hard-line Islamic gov't in 5 years. They'll see us as an enemy who assisted the pro-west gov't (assuming the rebels will even be pro-west if they win).
 
2012-08-02 09:21:01 AM  
Can you keep a secret?
Why should I, if you can't?
 
2012-08-02 09:21:04 AM  

unexplained bacon: and I say you'd be for this aid to the rebels (different than an invasion, very important point you seem to have problems with)


We used to just send military advisers to countries we eventually ended up putting troops on the round in - how is this different?

Oh, and I was never in favor of invading Iraq.
 
2012-08-02 09:22:33 AM  

penetrating_virga: EyeballKid: penetrating_virga: This stinks of the same smell as our other military conflicts over the last decade. Fainting couch? clever Cletus, you need to wake the fnck up.

Like you did, I guess. And let me surmise when that happened...was it around the same time you became a deficit hawk, say, around January 2009? Total coincidence, I'm certain.

Wrong dumbass.


I'm sure it was honest mistake, where's so many of you..
 
2012-08-02 09:24:16 AM  

MugzyBrown: With that said, invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force.


When the Chinese helped the Vietnamese fight us off, why didn't we treat it exactly like the Chinese invaded us?
 
2012-08-02 09:24:35 AM  

SN1987a goes boom: jaytkay: Republicans joining Iran in support of Assad regime in 3...2...1...

Why not? They'd sell weapons to Iran if it meant achieving their goals.


What you did there.... see it I
 
2012-08-02 09:25:13 AM  
MugzyBrown:

With that said, invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force.

well there's your problem...that's stupid.
 
2012-08-02 09:26:44 AM  

Happy Hours: unexplained bacon: and I say you'd be for this aid to the rebels (different than an invasion, very important point you seem to have problems with)

We used to just send military advisers to countries we eventually ended up putting troops on the round in - how is this different?

Oh, and I was never in favor of invading Iraq.


If we end up putting troops into Syria get back to me. I do not support that.

aid to rebels and invasion/occupation are very different. If you don't agree I don't know what to tell you.
 
2012-08-02 09:29:46 AM  

MugzyBrown: Same thing if the rebels win, but are overthrown by a hard-line Islamic gov't in 5 years. They'll see us as an enemy who assisted the pro-west gov't


yeah because a hard line Islamic govt would be US/Israel friendly otherwise right?
 
2012-08-02 09:30:31 AM  

sprawl15: When the Chinese helped the Vietnamese fight us off, why didn't we treat it exactly like the Chinese invaded us?


You don't think the we looked at the Chinese as an enemy..and kinda still do?

Of course your comparison is off.

Germany looked at the US as an enemy in WWII when we were assisting England during the BOB.

How do you think US/English relations would have been if the English were supplying the CSA during the civil war? Oh wait Just the idea of them receiving CSA diploments almost sparked war.
 
2012-08-02 09:32:14 AM  
Guns AND butter
 
2012-08-02 09:33:01 AM  
yeah because a hard line Islamic govt would be US/Israel friendly otherwise right?

Which country do we have the worst relations with in the middle east? Iran Why? Because we helped overthrow their government 40 years ago.
 
2012-08-02 09:33:54 AM  

MugzyBrown: sprawl15: When the Chinese helped the Vietnamese fight us off, why didn't we treat it exactly like the Chinese invaded us?

You don't think the we looked at the Chinese as an enemy..and kinda still do?

Of course your comparison is off.

Germany looked at the US as an enemy in WWII when we were assisting England during the BOB.

How do you think US/English relations would have been if the English were supplying the CSA during the civil war? Oh wait Just the idea of them receiving CSA diploments almost sparked war.


you can't be serious.

again looking at someone as an enemy isn't the same thing as having an open war with them.
you're trying to make two very different things the same, but you can't.

not to mention the fact that Syria already sees us as an enemy. You've really got less than nuthin' here.
 
2012-08-02 09:34:37 AM  

MugzyBrown: With that said, invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force.


no it's not. it's several orders of magnitude different.

that's like saying giving money to doctors without borders is exactly the same as quitting your private practice and moving overseas to donate your life to the charity.

the level of commitment is not the same.
 
2012-08-02 09:35:52 AM  

MugzyBrown: You don't think the we looked at the Chinese as an enemy..and kinda still do?


If they invaded/occupied California during the war, we wouldn't just have "looked at the Chinese as an enemy". We would have treated it like the act of war it was. The idea that "invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force" is blatantly false - yeah, it's definitely a hostile action, but certainly not on the same level as actual invasion/occupation.
 
2012-08-02 09:36:56 AM  
We're not doing enough to help them, but now that we're doing something, it's way too much.

Signed,

John McCain on behalf of the GOP
 
2012-08-02 09:38:35 AM  

MugzyBrown: yeah because a hard line Islamic govt would be US/Israel friendly otherwise right?

Which country do we have the worst relations with in the middle east? Iran Why? Because we helped overthrow their government 40 years ago.


I think their hate of Israel and their support of Hamas and the Palestinians vs Israel has a little something to do with it.
they're also paranoid about us taking their oil.
It's not just that one thing
the Persian history is long and storied
 
2012-08-02 09:39:59 AM  

sprawl15: MugzyBrown: You don't think the we looked at the Chinese as an enemy..and kinda still do?

If they invaded/occupied California during the war, we wouldn't just have "looked at the Chinese as an enemy". We would have treated it like the act of war it was. The idea that "invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force" is blatantly false - yeah, it's definitely a hostile action, but certainly not on the same level as actual invasion/occupation.


I'm tempted to believe maybe he's just that dense, but I have doubts. More likely it's just typical shiatstorm tactics.

if your best argument is to conflate two obviously different things then your best sucks.
 
2012-08-02 09:41:28 AM  

Happy Hours: unexplained bacon: and I say you'd be for this aid to the rebels (different than an invasion, very important point you seem to have problems with)

We used to just send military advisers to countries we eventually ended up putting troops on the round in - how is this different?

Oh, and I was never in favor of invading Iraq.


Looks like you forgot to log out of your alt, Mugzy,.
 
2012-08-02 09:41:39 AM  
MugzyBrown:

if invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to rebels then why the hell didn't we just aid anti-saddam rebels in Iraq and keep all that cash we blew stateside?

you're premise today is terrible I hope you're done now.
 
2012-08-02 09:42:37 AM  
your...
 
2012-08-02 09:43:00 AM  

sprawl15: If they invaded/occupied California during the war, we wouldn't just have "looked at the Chinese as an enemy". We would have treated it like the act of war it was. The idea that "invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force" is blatantly false - yeah, it's definitely a hostile action, but certainly not on the same level as actual invasion/occupation.


If the Iranian gov't provided a terror group with a few nuclear scientists and the weapon they helped build ended up killing thousands in the US, you don't think the US would see that as an act of war?

Do you think Obama would offer the same level of assistance to anti Putin rebels or anti Hu Jintao forces? No, because they can shoot back at us...and they probably would, because it'd be considered an act of war.
 
2012-08-02 09:47:11 AM  
MugzyBrown:

Are you going to address the example, or are you going to just keep changing the subject? If "invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force" is true, it's true in all cases. If it's not true in the case of the Chinese helping the Vietnamese, then your assertion is false. Period. Even if it's true in every single other historical example, it's not true in general. That's how these things work.

Act like an adult and address the topic.
 
2012-08-02 09:47:23 AM  
i.imgur.com

Why so Syria?
 
2012-08-02 09:47:27 AM  

MugzyBrown: sprawl15: If they invaded/occupied California during the war, we wouldn't just have "looked at the Chinese as an enemy". We would have treated it like the act of war it was. The idea that "invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force" is blatantly false - yeah, it's definitely a hostile action, but certainly not on the same level as actual invasion/occupation.

If the Iranian gov't provided a terror group with a few nuclear scientists and the weapon they helped build ended up killing thousands in the US, you don't think the US would see that as an act of war?

Do you think Obama would offer the same level of assistance to anti Putin rebels or anti Hu Jintao forces? No, because they can shoot back at us...and they probably would, because it'd be considered an act of war.


we aren't invading and occupying Syria. If you want to pretend we are then draw conclusions about 'libs' based on your imagined world good luck.

keep trying to make up a scenario in which your hopelessly flawed argument might make sense, meanwhile in this world we're talking about Obama helping Syrian rebels and your argument falls flat on it's face every time.
 
2012-08-02 09:47:30 AM  

Skleenar: Happy Hours: unexplained bacon: and I say you'd be for this aid to the rebels (different than an invasion, very important point you seem to have problems with)

We used to just send military advisers to countries we eventually ended up putting troops on the round in - how is this different?

Oh, and I was never in favor of invading Iraq.

Looks like you forgot to log out of your alt, Mugzy,.


Looks like you can't follow a thread.

unexplained bacon: if invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to rebels then why the hell didn't we just aid anti-saddam rebels in Iraq and keep all that cash we blew stateside?


If there were rebels in a position to threaten Saddam at the time, we probably would have, because the result is the same.

Just like we didn't initially put 50,000 troops in Afghanistan. We didn't need to. We used special forces, air power, and the northern alliance. Still looked like a big war.
 
2012-08-02 09:48:23 AM  

MugzyBrown: sprawl15: If they invaded/occupied California during the war, we wouldn't just have "looked at the Chinese as an enemy". We would have treated it like the act of war it was. The idea that "invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force" is blatantly false - yeah, it's definitely a hostile action, but certainly not on the same level as actual invasion/occupation.

If the Iranian gov't provided a terror group with a few nuclear scientists and the weapon they helped build ended up killing thousands in the US, you don't think the US would see that as an act of war?

Do you think Obama would offer the same level of assistance to anti Putin rebels or anti Hu Jintao forces? No, because they can shoot back at us...and they probably would, because it'd be considered an act of war.


Imagine that! There are a lot of imaginary situations that could be imagined that could make "aid" seem close to outright hostility. It also seems that the military capability and political will of a potential target for covert action matter! My, isn't the world a complex and interesting place!

I wonder what Happy Hours thinks.
 
2012-08-02 09:50:29 AM  

sprawl15: If it's not true in the case of the Chinese helping the Vietnamese, then your assertion is false. Period. Even if it's true in every single other historical example, it's not true in general. That's how these things work.

Act like an adult and address the topic.


I did address the topic by telling your equivalency was false, because the Chinese were not helping anti US Gov't forces from taking over the US.

And if you recall, I provided an example of European forces being perceived as to be being possibly open to the idea of maybe helping the CSA during the civil war... and that could have led to all out war with the US and England.
 
2012-08-02 09:51:14 AM  

Skleenar: Imagine that! There are a lot of imaginary situations that could be imagined that could make "aid" seem close to outright hostility. It also seems that the military capability and political will of a potential target for covert action matter! My, isn't the world a complex and interesting place!


well you see if the penguins gave zombie bin laden a vial of captain trips we would have to nuke antarctica and then hawaii would flood so we would have to nuke the ocean and furthermore
 
2012-08-02 09:51:43 AM  

spif: The real story is the source of this leak.


I'm going with Intentional. It didn't say much that you couldn't already figure out, but it got it to the top of Google News pretty damn quick. Sending message, etc.
 
2012-08-02 09:52:27 AM  

sprawl15: Skleenar: Imagine that! There are a lot of imaginary situations that could be imagined that could make "aid" seem close to outright hostility. It also seems that the military capability and political will of a potential target for covert action matter! My, isn't the world a complex and interesting place!

well you see if the penguins gave zombie bin laden a vial of captain trips we would have to nuke antarctica and then hawaii would flood so we would have to nuke the ocean and furthermore


♫ Burn the land and boil the sea.. ♫
 
2012-08-02 09:52:32 AM  
What's all this quibbling over the difference between boots and bombs? It doesn't matter how you shove your nose into Syria! Its none of your goddamn business!
 
2012-08-02 09:52:59 AM  
MugzyBrown:



if you learned anything from your years supporting a bad idea (invading iraq) I'd hope you learned that you are terrible at reading these things. You should have learned that if you're for something the right answer is to be against it...or at least you should have learned to stop talking, you likely have the wrong idea again.
 
2012-08-02 09:53:02 AM  

MugzyBrown: Looks like you can't follow a thread.


Me? Or you?

I'm not sure. But since your argument seems to be disingenuous fertilizer spreading, I'm pre-conditioned to expect other forms of disingenuousness out of you.
 
2012-08-02 09:53:23 AM  

Skleenar: Who's the hottie with Balki?


A duplicitous, lying c*nt rag. Newsweek had a piece by a journalist paid by Vogue to do a puff piece on the Syrian first lady. It closes with a great line, "What is consciousness when you're the first lady of hell?" Worth a read.
 
2012-08-02 09:54:13 AM  

Ned Stark: What's all this quibbling over the difference between boots and bombs? It doesn't matter how you shove your nose into Syria! Its none of your goddamn business!


So, then, that's nobody's business but the Turks'?
 
2012-08-02 09:56:30 AM  
if you learned anything from your years supporting a bad idea (invading iraq) I'd hope you learned that you are terrible at reading these things. You should have learned that if you're for something the right answer is to be against it...or at least you should have learned to stop talking, you likely have the wrong idea again.

What percisely makes invading Iraq a bad idea and assisting rebels in Libya & Syria a good idea?

Dig down to the core principles and tell me the difference, because when you get down to the bottom, you see the only difference is the price the US had to pay to get to the same result: An unstable government linked to western interference.
 
2012-08-02 09:57:06 AM  

Ned Stark: It doesn't matter how you shove your nose into Syria! Its none of your goddamn business!


Your just pissed because you got yourself caught in the middle of a dynastic struggle between two different noble houses and GWB got beheaded as a result.
 
2012-08-02 09:58:04 AM  

dookdookdook: So...just another one of those things that pretty much everyone besides al-Assad himself would approve of if not for Obama Derangement Syndrome?

Got it.

/off to the next thread


pretty much.
 
2012-08-02 09:58:07 AM  

MugzyBrown: I did address the topic by telling your equivalency was false, because the Chinese were not helping anti US Gov't forces from taking over the US.


What in the fark are you babbling about? I'm not making any equivalency, I'm taking your assertion ("invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force") and applying an example to it. If invasion/occupation is the same thing as aid to an anti-gov't force, then when the Chinese provided aid to an anti-gov't force during Vietnam, we would have considered it identically to if they had actually invaded/occupied US territory.

MugzyBrown: And if you recall, I provided an example


You're still not getting the whole 'proving your assertion' thing, are you?
 
Displayed 50 of 332 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report