Russia! Russia!! Russia!!!

[C-Mag]

We're 17 years into Middle East Adventures...……………. still no real answers on what victory conditions are, or when we know its safe to stop the ongoing adventures.


Spring 2001 - FBI and CIA have hints attacks are coming, they get in a pissing match and fail to prevent the attacks
9-11 attacks on US
Fall 2001 US mobilizes to Afghanistan
Spring 2003 US invades Iraq
April 2003 Sadam's statue and regime are toppled
Jan 2010 US supports Arab Spring
Spring 2011 US leads toppling of Qaddaffi in Libya
Summer 2011 US gets militarily involved in Yemeni civil war
2012 US starts aiding 'good' Syrian Rebels with weapons and training, it will lead to the rise of ISIS
9-11 2012 US mission in Benghazi attacked
2014 US intervention in Syria is Official
March 2017 US commits select ground forces to Syria

[Martin Hash]

You should listen to me more often. Whenever you don't, next thing you're believing in fairy tales.

A fairy tale like the one about the UK using nerve agents to attack the enemies of Russia on their own soil?
That is the RT version of the Sailsbury attack.

Link me to that. I'd like to hear what RT said. That was so bizarre; it was like the Seth Rich case here in the States.

[BjornP]

Our media actually has an established history of publishing international stories only when the IC wants us to go to war.

I know. But even you get stories from...say, China, about a riot being put down, and it's just... a story about a riot being put down. There may be sympathy, but no follow up op-eds about the terrible plight of the blabla tribe, or whatever, that serve as a call for "action". I'm trying to get Martin to think differently. To assume differently. Because you know something about the sources of alot of those stories?

They're not American. They don't share the motivations you and your deep state countrymen might have - even if they might get used by them.

Absorb news about the world, for the sake of getting information about the world, instead of rejecting it because you risk being exposed to manipulation. So, both you and Martin should try this the next time you see one of those: "We must do something about country X's plight!" - stories:

1. Read the story.

2. Identify who they want you to sympathize with.

3. Tell the air around you: "Fuck you government shrill for wanting to do something about X, but still, thank you for letting me know there's something nasty happening in that region, maybe I'll not invest in rubber for a week, now".

In other words, even if they have an agenda by sharing a story... just consider the news as "something that happened..but I don't have to do anything about". And then share that sentiment to people around you, so they read the news the same. Not as a call to action, but as information for its own sake.

[SuburbanFarmer]

You should listen to me more often. Whenever you don't, next thing you're believing in fairy tales.

A fairy tale like the one about the UK using nerve agents to attack the enemies of Russia on their own soil?
That is the RT version of the Sailsbury attack.

I remember an incident which happened 17 years ago today, the world came together to support the US and condemn the attack on them. Many countries joined your coalition and fought by your side in the ME.
What was Britains reward for spilling it's army's blood in your revenge war? A president who believed Russia's fairy tale over the evidence of British intelligence.
Next time you want support for one of your wars how keen do you think your allies will be?

We invaded Afghanistan and Iraq together, to find people in Pakistan. And to get some "yellow cake" or "chemical weapons" or "stop a dictator" or some shit.

Your soldiers' lives were tragically wasted along with ours, to feed the MIC. Sorry bout that.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Our media actually has an established history of publishing international stories only when the IC wants us to go to war.

I know. But even you get stories from...say, China, about a riot being put down, and it's just... a story about a riot being put down. There may be sympathy, but no follow up op-eds about the terrible plight of the blabla tribe, or whatever, that serve as a call for "action". I'm trying to get Martin to think differently. To assume differently. Because you know something about the sources of alot of those stories?

They're not American. They don't share the motivations you and your deep state countrymen might have - even if they might get used by them.

Absorb news about the world, for the sake of getting information about the world, instead of rejecting it because you risk being exposed to manipulation. So, both you and Martin should try this the next time you see one of those: "We must do something about country X's plight!" - stories:

1. Read the story.

2. Identify who they want you to sympathize with.

3. Tell the air around you: "Fuck you government shrill for wanting to do something about X, but still, thank you for letting me know there's something nasty happening in that region, maybe I'll not invest in rubber for a week, now".

In other words, even if they have an agenda by sharing a story... just consider the news as "something that happened..but I don't have to do anything about". And then share that sentiment to people around you, so they read the news the same. Not as a call to action, but as information for its own sake.

That's pretty much what we do now. We have absolutely zero influence on what our globe-spanning military is going to do. Anyone with a brain already opposes the Infinite War, but it doesn't matter in the least.

The world is at the mercy of our MIC. Just try not to blame the civilians shaking our heads at it.

[Speaker to Animals]

The world is at the mercy of our MIC. Just try not to blame the civilians shaking our heads at it.

You still don't understand the actual problem. The civilians are the ones to blame for this. You have a runaway MIC precisely because few Americans actually give a shit. They don't sacrifice a damned thing, so it's no skin off their back come election time.


Romney didn't lose because he wanted Forever War. Romney lost because he said a significant portion of the electorate are do-nothing takers, threatening the gibs train forthright. Election lost right there. A candidate could say let's go attack fucking Uganda for the fuck of it and it wouldn't seriously hurt his chances. Point out that, for example, women as a group are takers, don't serve, and generally don't contribute that much but constantly vote for more gibs.. election lost.

[Ph64]

??? R U saying that WHEN (not IF) there is a poison gas attack in Syria, Assad did it?

With a high degree of probablity, yes. You do remember he, unlike Saddam, actually had chemical weapons stockpiles? Oh, and he has planes.

I've been down this rabbit hole before.
1) Why the fuck does the U.S. care if there's "poison gas" or "barrel bombs" but don't give a shit about drones shooting up weddings?

Not saying you should, at all. That's the difference between knowing your media wants to manipulate you into supporting the toppling of Assad, versus media simply reporting on an ongoing news story. The facts are the same, but how it's presented... that's where the manipulation is.

2) Assad (and Russia) can win without gas attacks.

They can. And I don't think Russia would use, or would want Assad to use gas... unless it means winning the battle faster. But if he had objections to using chemical weapons, he'd have destroyed those stockpiles himself long before the civil war started, without international urging.

3) Where is this poison gas hidden?

I know that about as much as I know where their regular armaments are hidden. You think the Assad regime freely allow journalists into see their arsenal? Nah. They were supposed to have destroyed their chemical weapons around the time the civil war started... but the inspectors were trying to get to all those different stockpiles in the middle of a civil war.

4) Israel wants the U.S. to go to war with Syria, and this has all the earmarks of Israeli manipulation. What? You think I can't recognize when America is being manipulated?

The US branded Syria as a bad guy in the 70's or 80's, I think. But yeah, Israel would stand to gain the most from Syria being either regime-changed, or severely destabilized.

I watch RT with Chris Hedges, does that mean I'm being manipulated by Russia? Yes. My god, RT is more reliable than any American news channel. No.

IIRC, before Russia even started sending planes, S-400s, and troops to Syria was Obama's first "red line" over chemical weapons... And then (with Assad's agreement) the Russians agreed to take his stockpiles and destroy them, monitored by the U.N. Chemical weapons inspectors, and the U.N. inspectors verified they were gone from Syria.

Less than a year later was an unverified "Sarin" attack. Where did the Sarin come from?

Riddle me this, Assad knows (and the Russians know) if he uses chemical weapons he'll have US jets dropping bombs and cruise missiles flying in. So why would he do it? I mean, honestly, I've seen video interviews of the guy, he's a college educated (in London) ophthalmologist, he doesn't seem like a stupid man. Not stupid enough to have an overwhelming military force pointed at him holding a jar of ammonia saying "throw that ammonia and we blow the deal out of you" and he does it anyways. Not when he has Russia and Iran there to help him take Idlib without doing that.

On a cost/benefit basis it doesn't seem the cost would be worth any benefit he'd possibly get.

[SuburbanFarmer]

The world is at the mercy of our MIC. Just try not to blame the civilians shaking our heads at it.

You still don't understand the actual problem. The civilians are the ones to blame for this. You have a runaway MIC precisely because few Americans actually give a shit. They don't sacrifice a damned thing, so it's no skin off their back come election time.


Romney didn't lose because he wanted Forever War. Romney lost because he said a significant portion of the electorate are do-nothing takers, threatening the gibs train forthright. Election lost right there. A candidate could say let's go attack fucking Uganda for the fuck of it and it wouldn't seriously hurt his chances. Point out that, for example, women as a group are takers, don't serve, and generally don't contribute that much but constantly vote for more gibs.. election lost.

Every major candidate (and every POTUS) has promised to end the Infinite War. How do you blame civilians for believing them? How are we expected to know which of the two corrupt party bosses are actually going to do it?

Spoiler: Neither of them will. Ever.

So, once again, I ask you purely as an exercise in masochism: What is your solution? What action would you like American civilians to take, in order to end it?
Present state, not fantasy military-takeover land.

[Speaker to Animals]

The world is at the mercy of our MIC. Just try not to blame the civilians shaking our heads at it.

You still don't understand the actual problem. The civilians are the ones to blame for this. You have a runaway MIC precisely because few Americans actually give a shit. They don't sacrifice a damned thing, so it's no skin off their back come election time.


Romney didn't lose because he wanted Forever War. Romney lost because he said a significant portion of the electorate are do-nothing takers, threatening the gibs train forthright. Election lost right there. A candidate could say let's go attack fucking Uganda for the fuck of it and it wouldn't seriously hurt his chances. Point out that, for example, women as a group are takers, don't serve, and generally don't contribute that much but constantly vote for more gibs.. election lost.

Every major candidate (and every POTUS) has promised to end the Infinite War. How do you blame civilians for believing them? How are we expected to know which of the two corrupt party bosses are actually going to do it?

Spoiler: Neither of them will. Ever.

So, once again, I ask you purely as an exercise in masochism: What is your solution? What action would you like American civilians to take, in order to end it?
Present state, not fantasy military-takeover land.

They aren't held accountable to it. Obama got re-elected. Bush got re-elected.

Nobody gives a shit because it's not them doing 9+ combat deployments.

[SuburbanFarmer]

You still don't understand the actual problem. The civilians are the ones to blame for this. You have a runaway MIC precisely because few Americans actually give a shit. They don't sacrifice a damned thing, so it's no skin off their back come election time.


Romney didn't lose because he wanted Forever War. Romney lost because he said a significant portion of the electorate are do-nothing takers, threatening the gibs train forthright. Election lost right there. A candidate could say let's go attack fucking Uganda for the fuck of it and it wouldn't seriously hurt his chances. Point out that, for example, women as a group are takers, don't serve, and generally don't contribute that much but constantly vote for more gibs.. election lost.

Every major candidate (and every POTUS) has promised to end the Infinite War. How do you blame civilians for believing them? How are we expected to know which of the two corrupt party bosses are actually going to do it?

Spoiler: Neither of them will. Ever.

So, once again, I ask you purely as an exercise in masochism: What is your solution? What action would you like American civilians to take, in order to end it?
Present state, not fantasy military-takeover land.

They aren't held accountable to it. Obama got re-elected. Bush got re-elected.

Nobody gives a shit because it's not them doing 9+ combat deployments.

So then you'd like people to vote against Incumbents. I'm already doing that.