Quantcast
The Official US Politics OT

Forums - Politics Discussion - The Official US Politics OT

JRPGfan said:
 

Whats more messed up is that like 100,000+ refugees were made, of which a majority will probably head towards europe.

Ontop of that, if this escalates theres a chance it can effect the prisons in the area's that house ISIS terrorists.

No one (sane) wants to see instability in this area.

It's no longer a matter of speculation, but fact that ISIS prisoners are escaping amidst the fighting. I feel safer already!

President Trump has argued that we shouldn't beat around the bush, but call radical Islamic terrorism by its name. And then aid and abet it in practice, apparently.

Last edited by Jaicee - on 17 October 2019

Around the Network
Jaicee said:
JRPGfan said:

Whats more messed up is that like 100,000+ refugees were made, of which a majority will probably head towards europe.

Ontop of that, if this escalates theres a chance it can effect the prisons in the area's that house ISIS terrorists.

No one (sane) wants to see instability in this area.

It's no longer a matter of speculation, but fact that ISIS prisoners are escaping amidst the fighting. I feel safer already!

President Trump has argued that we shouldn't beat around the bush, but call radical Islamic terrorism by its name. And then aid and abet it in practice, apparently.

Yeah.... Im not a fan of Trump.

I honestly believe hes a puppet, or atleast acting partially on behalf of Putin.
He owes too much money to the russians and cut a deal or something.
They meddled in the election and he actually won (they both probably didnt expect him to either) (I dont think he even wanted to be president)

And hes not been great for europe, its like he's going out of his way to trip others (even/especially allies).
long term I doubt hes doing anything "great" (make america great again) to america either.



EricHiggin said:
Machiavellian said:

Its very evident that Turkey knew the time and moment when the US troops were pulling out since they were already mobilizing on exactly that moment.  The problem with Trump making last minute decisions that causes a massacre is something that probably should have been well thought out but as we have seen multiple times with this administration, well thought out decisions isn't one of it's strong points.  We will see how much Trump can make people pay because lately the only thing he has done is make everyone pay for his blunders.

As to your second paragraph, the situation still stands, are the kurds our allies or not.  This ideal you can throw blame somewhere else is a fallacy. The simple situation is that the US forces were on the ground in this area.  It was the US who made allies out of the Kurds which helped us and our President claim victory over an enemy and take all the credit.  What I feel for the Kurds is pretty simple.  If they are our allies, then we protect them like they are our allies, not stab them in the back the moment we get the opportunity.  Who cares about any other nation since it was our troops that held the ground from this event from happening.  It was a world class blunder that has cost and will cost countless lives and as an American, I see no reason to seek to share the blame or find some way to include anyone else because its very evident that none of that was done.

Well that seems to make me think the decision was being talked about and made ahead of time, because if Trump made the decisions last minute, how did the Turks know how to mobilize for that exact time? It could also mean there was a leak, which shouldn't have happened, but based on America's intelligence branches and there leaks over the last couple of years, well. If a leak did come from American intelligence to make the problem much worse, then considering who's been doing the majority of the leaking, and who it typically impacts, I'd say both sides are partially to blame.

If what other countries do or say doesn't matter, then who cares about anything related to Russia? They're just sticking their noses into America's business, so who cares? Russia sticking it's nose into America's election impacted the outcome you say? Well you know what would impact the outcome of the Kurd/Turk conflict right now? Another country who's capable, getting involved and helping solve the problem. Does one matter, yet the other doesn't, even though they both effect America?

Lastly, let's say you help a newly acquired friend financially who was slightly in debt, partially because nobody else will even though their capable, and because it will likely lead to a positive outcome for both of you. Now what if that friend get's kidnapped and held for a costly ransom like a month afterwards? If you don't pay that ransom to get them released, does that make you a terrible person, considering you tried to help a little in the first place? What about this friends parents, siblings, cousins, friends, etc, who all don't want this unfortunate soul to face the consequences? Do they factor into this at all? If they decide not to help out, does the finger get pointed solely at you, because you're the newest ally who decided to help a little bit?

Yes the decision was talked about between Trump and Erdogan but not with the very allies he should have been protecting.  Is this the point you are not getting.  Was it not Trump who had a meeting with Erdogan just before he pulled out our Troops.  I will leave that one for you to chew on as you look for another excuse.

To your second paragraph, stop gaslighting.  Stop trying to find some silver lining that make Trump decision any less what it is because you want to throw others into the mix.  If 2 people killed someone does it make it any less of a crime if we are talking about just one of them.  Stay focused on the current topic instead of trying to create something else.  Since we only know the decision by the person we are discussing lets not throw your hypothetical BS into the mix to derail the current topic.

To your third paragraph, its another one of your analogies that totally misses the mark.  Its some made up hypothetical situation that doesn't even relate to the current event and pretty much a throw away paragraph on nothing.

Here is how I interpreted it.  If I was your friend and helped you through tough times, if there ever was a situation where you could help me out, you would always be looking for a way to stab me in the back.  This is basically how you come off as a person who will always look for a way out of helping your friends if you find a way to do so. This is my analogy of your waffling, trying to find a way to make stabbing your allies in the back instead of looking for solutions.



EricHiggin said:
Baalzamon said:

The problem with your scenario is this wouldn't be helping the friend who got kidnapped with the ransom.

In your situation, what the US did was lend money to the person, then like 3 days later, took it all back and said sorry, you actually need to deal with this on your own.

I don't think you're following. I'm not saying what would be right or wrong, just presenting another way to look at it.

To help or not to help a new friend afterwards, even though you helped in the first place in another scenario, which benefited you to some degree.

Based on what was being argued, was that the new friend should go out of their way, to find a way, to get the ransom paid in this new scenario and not give up, while also having all the blame put on them, because the blame isn't to be shared with anyone else involved, or who could help, who also felt someone should do something.

*Think I see where you got confused. The very last line maybe should have ended with, 'decided to help a little bit in the first place'. That seemed apparent to me at the time since I was referencing a prior line, but looking at it another way, I can see why it may have been confusing.

No. You are wrong.

Your scenario suggests you help a friend by borrowing them money. The friend then gets kidnapped. While they are kidnapped, you continue helping them by letting them still borrow the initial money, but help EVEN FURTHER by also paying the ransom for their kidnapping. You are now currently out the initial money you borrowed them AS WELL as the ransom money. Two separate instances of help.

In the case of the Kurd scenario. This would be us providing troops (instance 1 of help). Then, once things get worse, us providing even more yet troops and support beyond the initial troops already there to help (instance 2).

What the US did is quite literally pull the money away that was just borrowed to the friend in the first place.



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

Eric, you do realize you are arguing against every single other person in here, regardless of whether they are affiliated left, center, or right?
That generally should be a warning sign that your thought process is pretty far fetched.

Look, I'm not saying I necessarily agree with us having troops there in the first place. But once we decided to have them there, it's kinda a BS move to just pull them away.



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

Around the Network
Jaicee said:
DarthMetalliCube said:
I approve of withdrawing our troops 100%. I'm fed up with my country acting as the world police. It's time to focus on our own issues. Let those abroad fight their own wars.

So why didn't we fight our own war against ISIS then? Why did we have the Kurdish people fight it for us before abandoning them to be killed?

Or were we supposed to do nothing about ISIS and just let them do whatever they wanted to anyone they wanted anywhere they wanted, including here in this country?

Also, our military assistance in the SDF's fight against ISIS was directly requested by them. We weren't just imposing ourselves on the region.

Also also, those U.S. troops in Northern Syria aren't "coming home", as Trump has claimed on Twitter. They're being redeployed to other parts of the Middle East that you might say require them less, so...

Yes. I'm tired of this subtle form of empire-building we've constantly been engaged in for decades. Not that I'm advocating for total isolationism but we're stretching ourselves too thin, spending billions on our military which is fighting these endless wars abroad, and at what cost? It's good to keep ISIS in check of course, but there are always going to be malignant elements across the world - it's an endless battle, and I'm sick of the US sticking their nose in everything. It's largely our foreign policy, wars, CIA-sponsored coups, etc which leads to the destabilization of nations and cause the blowback (and thus terrorist groups) that often occur in the first place. 

Well yeah, Trump's little better, but hopefully he's at least better prioritizing troop deployment. I don't know enough about that topic so I can't comment there. But what I do know is that us meddling in foreign affairs, starting wars, and overthrowing governments only to install our own pro-US dictators, causes a lot more harm than good in the long run.



Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the President of the United States.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

And on a sad note, Maryland Representative and House chair of the Committee on Oversight Elijah Cummings and Reform passed away last night at age 68.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

SpokenTruth said:

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the President of the United States.

"Please be fake, please be fake"

*Googles*

https://mobile.twitter.com/katierogers/status/1184567108853751809

Oh Grog it's real.  

I am not sure if I am or should be surprised.



In other news, Mulvaney basically admits to a quid pro quo with Ukraine:

"Did he also mention to me in [the] past the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely," Mulvaney said of a conversation he had Trump. "No question about that. But that's it, and that's why we held up the money."

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/17/mulvaney-confirms-ukraine-aid-2016-probe-050156

So, now we know that the money that was held up was held up in order to convince Ukraine to convince them to undertake and publicize highly political investigations on Trump's political opponents.