RP Listener Forum

Posted: Jun 15, 2013 - 8:15am

kurtster wrote:

We don't need unrest anywhere IMO. Unrest translates into death by violence in these regions I mentiond. I cannot advocate for that at all. But that is the way they do things over there. Time TGTFO of there, period. Our national security is not at stake in Syria. Is Canada's ? Or is Canada's national security tied directly to the US's ?

Nobody needs unrest or oppression for that matter. Yes, people get hurt or worse during unrest. I'm pretty sure some people got hurt while "you" fought for your independence. Canada's national security is indeed tied to the US.

Your country is energy indepedent. Ours can be if we want to be. With energy independence, the US can tell the rest of the world to Eff off. But we have to secure our borders or it won't mean a thing. Our Bystander In Chief wrote a political check his ass can't cash and had no plan for when that check he wrote a year ago came due. He drew a redline, it has been met. Now what ? We get sucked into a civil war that restarts the Cold War with the USSR Russia on the other side of our side ? The head of the KGB is running their show. We have a community organizer singing kumbya or however you write it running ours. I wonder what the odds in Vegas are on this one ? Sorry, as things stand this minute, my money is on Putin. Where's yours ?

Do you want Canada getting involved or the US or both ?

Drill for peace ...
Edit: just take the above at face value. no snark or baiting intended. just straight forward thoughts from a very tired person.

Canada is not my country (yet) either. Nor is it energy independent. It imports plenty of oil (it's hovered around 50% for some time, while exporting a lot too at an incredible expense to the environment, but I'm not sure where it's at currently).

No, I'd rather not see Canada get involved in Syria directly. As for the US, it's sort of in your DNA to get involved in other people's business, but ultimately that's primarily (though not exclusively) your business, as are the consequences. Though there is of course a difference between rhetoric and actual (economic) interests. It's not all about getting energy or other important resources, it's also about marketing (creating markets to sell stuff).

As for the so-called "red line", I'll believe it when we get to see solid evidence of the use of WMDs. We've heard that one before, no?

Posted: Jun 15, 2013 - 3:10am

sirdroseph wrote:

Yes, but is there any other kind? I wonder.

I remember and miss my younger days when I wondered.Now I just know.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 7:50pm

miamizsun wrote:

our leaders seem to love endless war...

Our corporate leaders too.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 7:42pm

RichardPrins wrote:

It depends on the particular unrest and who's creating it. I'm all for people getting rid of their corrupt leaderships.

Damn that was a long time ago, but thanks for the reply.

We don't need unrest anywhere IMO. Unrest translates into death by violence in these regions I mentiond. I cannot advocate for that at all. But that is the way they do things over there. Time TGTFO of there, period. Our national security is not at stake in Syria. Is Canada's ? Or is Canada's national security tied directly to the US's ?

Your country is energy indepedent. Ours can be if we want to be. With energy independence, the US can tell the rest of the world to Eff off. But we have to secure our borders or it won't mean a thing. Our Bystander In Chief wrote a political check his ass can't cash and had no plan for when that check he wrote a year ago came due. He drew a redline, it has been met. Now what ? We get sucked into a civil war that restarts the Cold War with the USSR Russia on the other side of our side ? The head of the KGB is running their show. We have a community organizer singing kumbya or however you write it running ours. I wonder what the odds in Vegas are on this one ? Sorry, as things stand this minute, my money is on Putin. Where's yours ?

Do you want Canada getting involved or the US or both ?

Drill for peace ...
Edit: just take the above at face value. no snark or baiting intended. just straight forward thoughts from a very tired person.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:50am

sirdroseph wrote:

Yeah, I'm sure something bad can be found about him as well... {#Wink}

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:41am

RichardPrins wrote:

I'd like to believe there are other possibilities. Almost nothing seems to be exclusively good, or bad...

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:39am

sirdroseph wrote:

Yes, but is there any other kind? I wonder.

I'd like to believe there are other possibilities. Almost nothing seems to be exclusively good, or bad...

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:31am

RichardPrins wrote:

It depends on the particular unrest and who's creating it. I'm all for people getting rid of their corrupt leaderships.

I say they do it the old fashioned way! Big brother needs to fold up shop and take care of local problems for a few decades!

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:30am

RichardPrins wrote:

It depends on the particular unrest and who's creating it. I'm all for people getting rid of their corrupt leaderships.

Yes, but is there any other kind? I wonder.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:27am

kurtster wrote:

(...) Are you happy with the unrest in the Middle East and Northeastern Africa ?

It depends on the particular unrest and who's creating it. I'm all for people getting rid of their corrupt leaderships.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:26am

miamizsun wrote:

we're pledging a lot of weapons/training and drones not to mention our leaders throw in 50 million dollars a day to support the rebels who support al kayda

anyone see the wisdom in this?

bueller? bueller? anyone?

I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler, circa 1935

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:21am

miamizsun wrote:

we're pledging a lot of weapons/training and drones not to mention our leaders throw in 50 million dollars a day to support the rebels who support al kayda

anyone see the wisdom in this?

bueller? bueller? anyone?

Hey, I have been saying this from the get go. This is wrong on every level, morally and logistically.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:05am

cc_rider wrote:

Well, the people who buy our leaders love it.

and we don't spend enough on war and mass destruction anyway....

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 8:02am

Red_Dragon wrote:

Still waiting for that war for which no one shows up.

we're pledging a lot of weapons/training and drones not to mention our leaders throw in 50 million dollars a day to support the rebels who support al kayda

anyone see the wisdom in this?

bueller? bueller? anyone?

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 7:55am

miamizsun wrote:

our leaders seem to love endless war...

Well, the people who buy our leaders love it.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 7:49am

miamizsun wrote:

our leaders seem to love endless war...

yep, it's profitable.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 7:40am

miamizsun wrote:

our leaders seem to love endless war...

Still waiting for that war for which no one shows up.

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 7:34am

miamizsun wrote:

our leaders seem to love endless war...

This will end well for NO ONE. {#No}

Posted: Jun 14, 2013 - 7:30am

our leaders seem to love endless war...

Posted: Jun 6, 2013 - 4:45pm

sirdroseph wrote:

Just watching the news and had a brilliant idea. We should blow everyone's mind and support Assad. Think about it, no question Assad remaining in power is the safest move. The devil you know scenario. Stabilization is key and Assad status quo is the only way to achieve this imo. We should work with Russia, having a common goal with improve our relationship as well. I even think that Israel fares better with the Shia as opposed to the Sunni. There is a precarious and precise balance of different factions all opposing each other holding this thing together and a Sunni takeover of Syria not only would leave Islamic extremists who hate America and Israel more than the Shia in control, it would preclude doing so by defeating not only Assad but Hezbollah itself. You're talking about a powder keg that could literally set off WWIII. {#Eek}

Oh and it is the only way to stop the killing of innocent civilians, there is that too.

I agree and for all the reasons you mentioned. I kinda came to the same conclusion about a week or so ago. It crystalized when McCain went over and visited Syria. If we partnered up with Russia on this it wuld send a real strong message to the radical Islamists, that their party is over.

Glad to know that I am not alone in these thoughts.