Truth Discussion Time - Page 78

USA today?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...d-up-hands-isis-terrorists/949209001/

On March 11 2018 01:06 NMcNasty wrote: [QUOTE]On March 10 2018 22:35 Stroggoz wrote: those are necessary but insufficient conditions. For example what about the fact that russia supports assad?

we shouldn't be spazzing out shouting WARMONGERS at every mention of getting involved. What's holding the international community back from full involvement in Syria is fear of Russia.





the default ought to be complete opposition to war until it can be morally justified, who is 'we' when it comes to calling america warmongers? It is sensible to take that position as a default, since their track record is as a violent imperial power. It's not spazzing to call america war mongers or imperialists. Articulate people arn't using the word war monger though, they call america an imperial power. Your trying to paint people who disagree with you as irrational and rhetorical by saying they are spazzing and using words like warmonger. Also, the word 'international community', what does that actually mean? typically it's used as an Orwellian code for American elite interests. When that word is used in the establishment media like the new york times it never includes peasants in latin america, south east asia, or any of the other 80% of the worlds population and their opinions.

I havn't followed much on the syrian war in the last year, so i can't comment any further, but i have read quite a bit of history on america's foreign affairs and my question to you is why focus on a conflict where intervention seems insane, when there are a million other things that are much easier to accomplish, far more helpful, and dont require military intervention? I mean intervening military in western syria would be insane right now. We can look at history and see that the invasion of Iraq, which was a stand alone country without external support, still killed hundreds of thousands of people, and most people in iraq think the place is worse now than it was then. Or at least that's what journalists like patrick cockburn who live there say.

as for my comment on internal demcractic resistance i meant in western syria. I think the US air support for the Kurds is ok, and is/was morally justified as they faced the threat of aggression from ISIS. However we know the US is only supporting the Kurds because they hate ISIS more, and the Kurds have been betrayed in the past and likely will be betrayed again. We know that the US used to be arming groups that were similar to al queda or al nusra in resistance in sryia to oppose assad, im not sure if thats still going on since i havnt followed it lately. That was clearly wrong.

Also russia's intervention in ukraine had severe consequences, the country now has dictatorship that has a strong nazi base, which, yet again, was a reaction from western powers. I think it had something to do with repayment of a loan to the IMF as well, but i havn't looked to closely at that. But this is russian border. what if russia tried to do this on the american border, say canada or mexico, or even indonesia, a state that is well under US corporate loot control whereas ukraine is very close to russia. The consequences would be severe. Also, tensions on that border have almost resulted in accidental nuclear war at least once. It's actually remarkable reading into the history of near miss nuclear wars, something that should be on the news almost every day but never is.

Yep its a conspiracy. I like how you ignored the "why you sell weapons to Saudi Arabia" question.

Let me explain. Saudi Arabia also buys ALL of the weapons that are being produced in Bulgaria. All of the weapon production factories are held by Americans. These same weapons and bombs were traced down to ISIS in the end. Again not a direct tie and certainly it's Saudi Arabia's fault that they are selling weapons to ISIS. Then why the fuck did your government sign the biggest arms deal in humankind's history to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia? Again are they incompetent, or do they just not give a fuck. Oh wait yes its a conspiracy. Let's simply ignore all the facts and call fake news. You must be a Trump supporter. If you've read 5% of my posts you'd realize there is about 0% chance I'd get under the influence of RUssian troll propagandas, but then again your arguments are based on beliefs while mine are based on facts. No point in arguing with that.

On March 11 2018 08:02 Stroggoz wrote: Your trying to paint people who disagree with you as irrational and rhetorical by saying they are spazzing and using words like warmonger.

Maybe it was just Baal, but the word was very specifically used to describe US policy in Syria.

Also, the word 'international community', what does that actually mean? typically it's used as an Orwellian code for American elite interests. When that word is used in the establishment media like the new york times it never includes peasants in latin america, south east asia, or any of the other 80% of the worlds population and their opinions.

Mainly I just mean something like the UN, but not necessarily, since for a lot of conflicts many nations have no incentive to even voice an opinion. In the case of Syria its not like the US has support of a few dozen nations but is being condemned overall.

I havn't followed much on the syrian war in the last year, so i can't comment any further, but i have read quite a bit of history on america's foreign affairs and my question to you is why focus on a conflict where intervention seems insane, when there are a million other things that are much easier to accomplish, far more helpful, and dont require military intervention?

Syria isn't my focus. If anything my focus would be removing Donald Trump from power which would have effect of cooling down American foreign policy overall. The problem is, in the process of advocating that, his political opponents get attacked, and I'll actually defend their policies (if I agree with them) rather than try to change the subject.

I mean intervening military in western syria would be insane right now. We can look at history and see that the invasion of Iraq, which was a stand alone country without external support, still killed hundreds of thousands of people, and most people in iraq think the place is worse now than it was then. Or at least that's what journalists like patrick cockburn who live there say.

Again, its an entirely different situation starting a war, and entering one that has already started, and I'm not trying to defend US policy toward Iraq in the least. And I really have no problem with the view that the US staying out of Syria is entirely is our best option, at times I don't even disagree, my problem more has to do with the clicking buttons approach people have to politics today where not only are basic facts not agreed upon, but the concept doesn't even seem important to people.

On March 11 2018 11:00 Spitfiree wrote: Yep its a conspiracy. I like how you ignored the "why you sell weapons to Saudi Arabia" question. Let me explain. Saudi Arabia also buys ALL of the weapons that are being produced in Bulgaria. All of the weapon production factories are held by Americans. These same weapons and bombs were traced down to ISIS in the end. Again not a direct tie and certainly it's Saudi Arabia's fault that they are selling weapons to ISIS. Then why the fuck did your government sign the biggest arms deal in humankind's history to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia? Again are they incompetent, or do they just not give a fuck. Oh wait yes its a conspiracy. Let's simply ignore all the facts and call fake news. You must be a Trump supporter. If you've read 5% of my posts you'd realize there is about 0% chance I'd get under the influence of RUssian troll propagandas, but then again your arguments are based on beliefs while mine are based on facts. No point in arguing with that.

I'll go ahead and humor a whataboutism one last time. I already explained how the subject is just being endlessly changed on me, with the assumption that I support American foreign policy for whatever issue when I generally don't.

US support for Saudi Arabia is entirely strategic. Its beneficial for the US (and most of the western world) to be allied with an oil rich country that won't crash the price on a whim. Its also beneficial to be allied with arguably the most important country for Islam. If the US were to withdraw arming the Saudis, its very possible the country would be taken over by radicals. I'm guessing you know all that and you're question is rhetorical but its sometimes hard to tell when your general view is that the US is just arming people randomly.

Anyway I absolutely feel that the US could somehow promote democracy in Saudi Arabia, or at least humanitarian reforms, while still being allied. Also, as is always the case, I'm sure our weapon assistance is overkill, and yes when you produce so much there's always the problem of it falling into the wrong hands.

On March 11 2018 16:44 NMcNasty wrote: Again, its an entirely different situation starting a war, and entering one that has already started, and I'm not trying to defend US policy toward Iraq in the least. And I really have no problem with the view that the US staying out of Syria is entirely is our best option, at times I don't even disagree, my problem more has to do with the clicking buttons approach people have to politics today where not only are basic facts not agreed upon, but the concept doesn't even seem important to people.

At the end of the day, no matter the era, the majority of people will always have a clicking buttons approach towards politics. What's pissing most people off is that the US is acting as the world's police and doing it in an incompetent way under false propaganda such as "keeping people's freedom" ... by invading countries which are of no threat whatsoever to them.

What pisses me off is not what the US is doing, if we move all feelings/humane reasons aside, rationally your government is doing a good job of keeping the world under control geopolitically. That's why the US is considered the most advanced nation, even though all of your social systems e.g. healthcare, education are light years away from Europeans. People that actually believe that the US is doing, what they're doing "for the greater good" and for "liberty and freedom" etc. are simply ignorant and that pisses me off quite a lot, cause that leads to those pieces of shit getting support from the masses. And I don't exactly care if its the US or Russia or whatever (russians are just as bad, considering they will reelect Putin and they actually love the guy). Always question every step your government takes and always treat their information as propaganda, it's the only way to keep elites in check. If you want the world to progress you shouldn't view your country as something that matters, you should think if your government is making good decisions on a global level, otherwise, we're nothing more than just a bunch of tribes in a more developed civilization.

I'm also referring to they/them, cause even though you're an American you have absolutely no say whatsoever, not with casting your vote, not with anything else.

you keep saying you do not support American foreign policy yet you say invations that havent even been done are morality justified and worse of all you just also justified the biggest arm deals in history with Saudi Arabia, arguably the most fundamentalist of all the muslims countries and the biggest sponsor of muslim terrorists, native country of Osama Bin Laden.

On March 11 2018 17:10 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + On March 11 2018 11:00 Spitfiree wrote: Yep its a conspiracy. I like how you ignored the "why you sell weapons to Saudi Arabia" question. Let me explain. Saudi Arabia also buys ALL of the weapons that are being produced in Bulgaria. All of the weapon production factories are held by Americans. These same weapons and bombs were traced down to ISIS in the end. Again not a direct tie and certainly it's Saudi Arabia's fault that they are selling weapons to ISIS. Then why the fuck did your government sign the biggest arms deal in humankind's history to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia? Again are they incompetent, or do they just not give a fuck. Oh wait yes its a conspiracy. Let's simply ignore all the facts and call fake news. You must be a Trump supporter. If you've read 5% of my posts you'd realize there is about 0% chance I'd get under the influence of RUssian troll propagandas, but then again your arguments are based on beliefs while mine are based on facts. No point in arguing with that. I'll go ahead and humor a whataboutism one last time. I already explained how the subject is just being endlessly changed on me, with the assumption that I support American foreign policy for whatever issue when I generally don't. US support for Saudi Arabia is entirely strategic. Its beneficial for the US (and most of the western world) to be allied with an oil rich country that won't crash the price on a whim. Its also beneficial to be allied with arguably the most important country for Islam. If the US were to withdraw arming the Saudis, its very possible the country would be taken over by radicals. I'm guessing you know all that and you're question is rhetorical but its sometimes hard to tell when your general view is that the US is just arming people randomly. Anyway I absolutely feel that the US could somehow promote democracy in Saudi Arabia, or at least humanitarian reforms, while still being allied. Also, as is always the case, I'm sure our weapon assistance is overkill, and yes when you produce so much there's always the problem of it falling into the wrong hands.

uh, saudi arabia is a very young country. It was taken by radicals already, with the help of the british and americans. Since then the radicals, or saud family, have been in charge, and have spread their radical islamic fundamentalism over a good chunk of the globe. I don't see how being allied to the al saud family has been beneficial to anyone in the west except for a wealthy minority who gain huge amounts of cash from this partnership.

On March 11 2018 17:10 NMcNasty wrote: If the US were to withdraw arming the Saudis, its very possible the country would be taken over by radicals.

That is exactly whats happening in Syria, radical islamists are the main opposition of Assad, who basically runs a laic government

Saudi Arabia IS a radical theorcracy, arguably the most radical and brutal followers of sharia law of all of the middle eastern countries, but unlike the others who got shredded to pieces by american drones, the Saudis cooperate with US interests in regards to oil.


I dont know if its just a serious case of cognitive dissonance or just plain old stupidity, but damn.

On March 12 2018 00:55 Baalim wrote: you keep saying you do not support American foreign policy yet you say invations that havent even been done are morality justified and worse of all you just also justified the biggest arm deals in history with Saudi Arabia, arguably the most fundamentalist of all the muslims countries and the biggest sponsor of muslim terrorists, native country of Osama Bin Laden.

And this is what I mean by clicking buttons. You have the factual tidbit about Bin Laden being born Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia is building mosques "everywhere", so apparently they're the biggest sponsors of Muslim terrorists despite physically fighting against them. Its the same derp as "US is arming ISIS" in Syria.

On March 12 2018 00:58 Stroggoz wrote: uh, saudi arabia is a very young country. It was taken by radicals already, with the help of the british and americans. Since then the radicals, or saud family, have been in charge, and have spread their radical islamic fundamentalism over a good chunk of the globe. I don't see how being allied to the al saud family has been beneficial to anyone in the west except for a wealthy minority who gain huge amounts of cash from this partnership.

The point is that the country as a whole is reasonably western friendly in large part due to strong ties with the US. If the US were to immediately withdraw all support, close its bases, and denounce the nation as a backwards theocracy (which admittedly it is) it could easily become another Iran.

On March 12 2018 17:22 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + On March 12 2018 00:55 Baalim wrote: you keep saying you do not support American foreign policy yet you say invations that havent even been done are morality justified and worse of all you just also justified the biggest arm deals in history with Saudi Arabia, arguably the most fundamentalist of all the muslims countries and the biggest sponsor of muslim terrorists, native country of Osama Bin Laden. And this is what I mean by clicking buttons. You have the factual tidbit about Bin Laden being born Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia is building mosques "everywhere", so apparently they're the biggest sponsors of Muslim terrorists despite physically fighting against them. Its the same derp as "US is arming ISIS" in Syria.

Saudi arabia funds islamic fundamentalism all over the world, as far as places like indonesia. For example while a large part of the funding of the mujaheddin came from the CIA, a lot of it also came from saudi arabia. here's an article from the independent saying that saudi arabia was arming al nusra in 2015 in the syrian conflict. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor...g-anti-assad-jihadists-10242747.html.

On March 12 2018 17:22 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + On March 12 2018 00:55 Baalim wrote: you keep saying you do not support American foreign policy yet you say invations that havent even been done are morality justified and worse of all you just also justified the biggest arm deals in history with Saudi Arabia, arguably the most fundamentalist of all the muslims countries and the biggest sponsor of muslim terrorists, native country of Osama Bin Laden. And this is what I mean by clicking buttons. You have the factual tidbit about Bin Laden being born Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia is building mosques "everywhere", so apparently they're the biggest sponsors of Muslim terrorists despite physically fighting against them. Its the same derp as "US is arming ISIS" in Syria.

sigh... I didn't reach that conclusion because of Bin laden or anything about mosques, I thought SA funding terrorists was common knowledge but apparently for some people it isn't, so here it is buddy:

[quote]While Saudi Arabia is often a secondary source of funds and support for terror movements who can find more motivated and ideologically invested benefactors (e.g. Qatar), Saudi Arabia arguably remains the most prolific sponsor of international Islamist terrorism, allegedly supporting groups as disparate as the Afghanistan Taliban, Al Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the Al-Nusra Front.[107][108]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism

I can link you to literally dozens of investigations reaching that conclusions from TNYT, WaPo and other prestigious publications,, also Wikileaks has showed evidence for it, the Podesta emails also talk about the Saudis funding terrorists.


Go educate yourself my "pacifist" friend, the Dunning Kruger effect is strong with this one lol.

But before our local Mahatma Ghandi goes on and justifies another war, heres something silly to discuss:

The Guardian talks about video games fueling the rise of the far right and mysoginy and here are the examples:



article: https://www.theguardian.com/commentis...uel-rise-far-right-violent-misogynist


Those plants vs zombies are anti-migration racists, the C&C imperialist swines, and dont get me started on the farmville white supremacists lol.


edit: I just noticed they mention Tropico, a builder where you are literally a communist dictator running a caribbean country

While Saudi Arabia is often a secondary source of funds and support for terror movements who can find more motivated and ideologically invested benefactors (e.g. Qatar), Saudi Arabia arguably remains the most prolific sponsor of international Islamist terrorism, allegedly supporting groups as disparate as the Afghanistan Taliban, Al Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the Al-Nusra Front.[107][108]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism

No real direct ties to the government, it even says "allegedly" in your gotcha quote. You're also switching back and forth meanings of "Saudi Arabia" to mean the country as a whole or just the government. Its like saying "Mexico supports narcotics". You can show statistics of how much Mexico exports narctotics, and you can show news stories that show links to corrupt government officials but it would be incredibly stupid to act like the government as a whole (as in federal government) supports drug traffickers when you're fighting bloody battles against them.

On March 12 2018 22:56 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On March 12 2018 17:22 NMcNasty wrote:   On March 12 2018 00:55 Baalim wrote: you keep saying you do not support American foreign policy yet you say invations that havent even been done are morality justified and worse of all you just also justified the biggest arm deals in history with Saudi Arabia, arguably the most fundamentalist of all the muslims countries and the biggest sponsor of muslim terrorists, native country of Osama Bin Laden. And this is what I mean by clicking buttons. You have the factual tidbit about Bin Laden being born Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia is building mosques "everywhere", so apparently they're the biggest sponsors of Muslim terrorists despite physically fighting against them. Its the same derp as "US is arming ISIS" in Syria. Saudi arabia funds islamic fundamentalism all over the world, as far as places like indonesia. For example while a large part of the funding of the mujaheddin came from the CIA, a lot of it also came from saudi arabia. here's an article from the independent saying that saudi arabia was arming al nusra in 2015 in the syrian conflict. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor...g-anti-assad-jihadists-10242747.html.

Obviously its awful that such groups would be funded at any level by any means but the article is pretty vague on where exactly the aid is coming from and how direct the support is. Al Qaeda, ISIS, and al Nusra are officially listed as terrorist organizations by the Saudi Arabian government. In the case of ISIS they've specifically carried out air strikes against them.

just a useful article for conflict though a bit old (2015): https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2015/oct/09/who-backs-whom-in-the-syrian-conflict

http://en.etilaf.org/press/assad-regime-deploys-chlorine-gas-genocide-will-not-stop-without-urgent-int-l-intervention.html

In blatant violation of UN Security Council resolutions 2209 and 2118 as well as resolution 2401 calling for cessation of hostilities, regime forces once again used barrel bombs loaded with chlorine poison gas in eastern Ghouta. The attack resulted in around 40 cases of asphyxiation among civilians in the towns of Hammouriya and Beit Sawa in the Damascus suburb. The genocidal campaign in eastern Ghouta continues. Over 100 civilians were killed on Monday, bringing to over 800 the total number of civilians who have been killed since the start of the onslaught. Assad demonstrated once again that his crimes would not stop as there is nothing to prevent the continuation of the killings, be it UN resolutions or statements by the international community expressing concern. This means that the genocidal campaign will continue and that UN Security Council resolution 2401 calling for at least 30-day cessation of hostilities remains largely unimplemented. It is a disgrace that stopping the genocide taking place now in eastern Ghouta still depends on international resolutions that cannot be issued without the approval of the criminals, making these resolutions toothless and lacking any chances of implementation. There is no doubt that the indecisiveness and inaction of the international community are to blame for the current situation in Syria and the region. The onslaught on eastern Ghouta is causing high civilian casualties. Around 400,000 civilians trapped in eastern Ghouta are in urgent need for an action to put an end to the hell on earth they are living in. The genocidal campaign being carried out by the Assad regime, the Russian occupation, and the Iranian militias in eastern Ghouta will not stop unless there is a serious international intervention and real pressure is urgently exerted on these gangs at the highest possible levels. The Syrian Coalition calls on the permanent members of the UN Security Council, whose primary task is the preservation of international peace and security, to take measures bypassing Russia's attempts to disrupt the Security Council and preventing the achievement of international justice. These measures should include deterrent military action to put an end to the onslaught by the Assad regime and the Iranian terrorist militias against our people trapped in eastern Ghouta; punish war criminals and perpetrators of the crime of using chemical weapons and toxic gases; and protect millions of Syrians whose cities and homes are being destroyed.

They're probably just terrorists though, nothing to see here.

On March 13 2018 03:33 NMcNasty wrote: http://en.etilaf.org/press/assad-regime-deploys-chlorine-gas-genocide-will-not-stop-without-urgent-int-l-intervention.html Show nested quote + In blatant violation of UN Security Council resolutions 2209 and 2118 as well as resolution 2401 calling for cessation of hostilities, regime forces once again used barrel bombs loaded with chlorine poison gas in eastern Ghouta. The attack resulted in around 40 cases of asphyxiation among civilians in the towns of Hammouriya and Beit Sawa in the Damascus suburb. The genocidal campaign in eastern Ghouta continues. Over 100 civilians were killed on Monday, bringing to over 800 the total number of civilians who have been killed since the start of the onslaught. Assad demonstrated once again that his crimes would not stop as there is nothing to prevent the continuation of the killings, be it UN resolutions or statements by the international community expressing concern. This means that the genocidal campaign will continue and that UN Security Council resolution 2401 calling for at least 30-day cessation of hostilities remains largely unimplemented. It is a disgrace that stopping the genocide taking place now in eastern Ghouta still depends on international resolutions that cannot be issued without the approval of the criminals, making these resolutions toothless and lacking any chances of implementation. There is no doubt that the indecisiveness and inaction of the international community are to blame for the current situation in Syria and the region. The onslaught on eastern Ghouta is causing high civilian casualties. Around 400,000 civilians trapped in eastern Ghouta are in urgent need for an action to put an end to the hell on earth they are living in. The genocidal campaign being carried out by the Assad regime, the Russian occupation, and the Iranian militias in eastern Ghouta will not stop unless there is a serious international intervention and real pressure is urgently exerted on these gangs at the highest possible levels. The Syrian Coalition calls on the permanent members of the UN Security Council, whose primary task is the preservation of international peace and security, to take measures bypassing Russia's attempts to disrupt the Security Council and preventing the achievement of international justice. These measures should include deterrent military action to put an end to the onslaught by the Assad regime and the Iranian terrorist militias against our people trapped in eastern Ghouta; punish war criminals and perpetrators of the crime of using chemical weapons and toxic gases; and protect millions of Syrians whose cities and homes are being destroyed. They're probably just terrorists though, nothing to see here.

really good source

lol cool story bro


meanwhile dozens of sources in the wikipedia page, TNTY, WaPo etc are meaningless and I'm just "clicking buttons" on my assertions that SA sponsors radical islamist groups

On March 13 2018 01:55 Baalim wrote: But before our local Mahatma Ghandi goes on and justifies another war, heres something silly to discuss: The Guardian talks about video games fueling the rise of the far right and mysoginy and here are the examples: article: https://www.theguardian.com/commentis...uel-rise-far-right-violent-misogynist Those plants vs zombies are anti-migration racists, the C&C imperialist swines, and dont get me started on the farmville white supremacists lol. edit: I just noticed they mention Tropico, a builder where you are literally a communist dictator running a caribbean country

LOOOOOL PLANT VS ZOMBIE BORDER CONTROL
That is amazing and hilarious