Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tyranny of Low Expectations

124»

Comments

  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    It is saddening, what America has become, under Trump. This is not the proud warrior nation, free and brave, which stands by its allies.

    Most Americans will be repelled by Trump’s behavior. He will either be impeached or he will lose badly in 2020. His Syria decision was an epochal error.

    Wrong.

    58% of American voters back Trump's position, they are fed up of endless wars and the US always having to take the body bags and pay the defence bills.


    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars

    We would also be complete hypocrites attacking Trump having withdrawn British forces from Syria and Iraq.

    You really are blinded by the dangerous and absurd Trump. What happened to the moderate remain voting conservative
    Unless we are willing to send British troops to Syria we have no right lecturing Trump
    Of course we can attack Trump who is dangerous to peace
    No we can't, not unless we send British troops to support the Kurds

    We would do well to note Trump’s willingness to abandon America’s Kurdish allies to genocide and conclude that as long as he is in the Oval Office the US is not to be trusted.

    Trump is pursuing an 'America First' agenda much as Brexit was a vote for 'Britain First'.

    It was not a vote to be submerged in either the EU or USA

    Yes, Trump’s strategy is to allow the Turks to massacre Kurdish troops and civilians who at the US’s behest sacrificed so much to play a pivotal role in defeating ISIS, a key US strategic objective. Anyone who trusts Trump’s America is a fool.

    Except in reality it isn't given tonight Syrian forces are heading to join the Kurds to fight the Turks after a Deal between the Kurds and Assad.

    No real surprise as both oppose Turkey, the Kurds for obvious reasons and Assad due to Turkish support for the Syrian rebels

    That is a reaction to Trump’s strategy of abandoning the Kurds to massacre.

    Trump's strategy is proved correct as it shows the Kurds do not need to rely solely on US support

    Thousands of Kurds have already been killed, American forces have come under fire and hundreds of ISIS prisoners have escaped. It’s been nothing short of a triumph for Trump.

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,774
    edited October 2019
    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008

    HYUFD said:


    Either you support a neocon agenda and US intervention in the Middle East or you don't

    Asking for a friend, is Trump hooring out US troops to Saudi Arabia for money part of a neocon agenda and US intervention in the Middle East?
    Trump is just protecting oil supplies in accordance with his 'America First' agenda given Iranian attacks on Saudi oil infrastructure
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    edited October 2019
    Noo said:

    Even people from fucking Lincolnshire should be allowed to vote here.

    I was with you until you made this ridiculous statement!!

    :D
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    She had to act on the information passed in real time.
    I think you minimise the reality of the situation and the decision to be made.

    You're a policeman, I believe, or were.

    So let me ask you this.

    How often, in your experience, do police officers shoot a man under restraint and then repeatedly lie about what happened? (Which is effectively the ruling as to the course of events by the jury at the inquest.)

    Because if the answer is 'frequently,' as a country we have a big problem.

    And if the answer is, 'that shouldn't happen,' then I am afraid all excuses are rendered meaningless.

    Having been in London myself that day and remembering how tense it was I can forgive a lapse of judgement at the time. What bothers me is the very clear implication there was massive dishonesty on the part of the police across a number of different teams to cover up very serious avoidable mistakes that had lethal consequences, with her the common factor among them.

    At the very least, I would suggest that shows she is not a strong or effective leader.
    Look at her response on Beech. When the senior officer said his allegations were “true” she said that she thought at the time that he shouldn’t have said that, not what he meant, blah, blah. But then did the square root of fuck all about it. And as it turned out he did mean it. He intended to say this. He didn’t mis-speak because that’s the training the police are given. And Cressida Dick would have known that.

    So even in relation to this she was being utterly disingenuous - or lying, in other words.

    Simply. Not. Good. Enough.
    It goes back to Blair’s* politicisation of the police force

    * Ian Blair
    Only a small part of the answer. See the various Irish miscarriages of justice before then.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Until now I thought trump would pull off a victory next year, the economy would be bouncing back from a slowdown and overall he would be seen as "not as bad as the Dems say". After the Syria withdrawal I think he's not going to win, the Dems have the perfect stick to beat him with, stabbing the vanquishers of ISIS in the back will have gone down very, very badly with his base.

    I think he's done.

    58% of US voters back Trump's policy, including 69% of Republicans

    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars
    And when the terrorist attacks by ISIS happen?
    They won't given Trump's tough immigration policy and his refusal unlike the last administration to try and topple Assad when Assad was the best bulwark against ISIS in Syria
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Until now I thought trump would pull off a victory next year, the economy would be bouncing back from a slowdown and overall he would be seen as "not as bad as the Dems say". After the Syria withdrawal I think he's not going to win, the Dems have the perfect stick to beat him with, stabbing the vanquishers of ISIS in the back will have gone down very, very badly with his base.

    I think he's done.

    58% of US voters back Trump's policy, including 69% of Republicans

    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars
    Really - you've already seen the post invasion polling ?

    As for the “endless wars”, I posted this below (which like most of the inconvenient rebuttals of you nonsense, you have ignored):

    “Putting an end to endless war doesn't mean ending American engagement around the world,“
    “Often, it means making sure we do our part to stabilize or help keep the peace, so that full-blown conflicts don't break out. Look at what's happened here. This isn't even a strategy or a policy. It is the president systematically destroying American alliances and American values. And that makes America worse off.“
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,980

    Floater said:

    The main story on the BBC is that US forces are in retreat in the face of advancing Turkish forces.

    That would be Turkey, NATO ally.

    Allegedly Syria has agreed to assist the Kurds fight off Turkey.

    Which I assume means Russia is on board
    Well, it is Syrian territory!
    Turkey about to get a shock, hopefully they get a good kicking
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    Either you support a neocon agenda and US intervention in the Middle East or you don't

    Asking for a friend, is Trump hooring out US troops to Saudi Arabia for money part of a neocon agenda and US intervention in the Middle East?
    Trump is just protecting oil supplies in accordance with his 'America First' agenda given Iranian attacks on Saudi oil infrastructure
    The US is a net exporter of oil. Try again.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    nico67 said:

    Floater said:

    The main story on the BBC is that US forces are in retreat in the face of advancing Turkish forces.

    That would be Turkey, NATO ally.

    Allegedly Syria has agreed to assist the Kurds fight off Turkey.

    Which I assume means Russia is on board
    This is a complete disaster . Trumps action is one of the worst in recent history , utterly despicable and a shameful betrayal of the Kurds who have been instrumental in defeating ISIS.

    GOP: hang your heads in utter shame.
    I’ve been ranting about this for days. It might well be the end of Trump, even as he survives everything else.

    He has brought shame on the American military, and dishonored America itself, his patriotic base will hate this.
    They won't , they don't want any more body bags of American servicemen coming from the Middle East and given the British have withdrawn forces from Iraq and Syria we can hardly criticise
    As an aside, if an ISIS member who had previously been help prisoner by the Kurds commits a terrorist attack on US soil, how popular do you think President Trump's policy will be then?
    Given Trump's extremely tough immigration policy and ban on migrants and tourists to the US from many Middle Eastern countries that is unlikely
    Ummm.

    Do you think terrorists typically emigrate to the countries they plan on attacking?
    Under Trump's policy they cannot even go there to study or as tourists let alone to migrate
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    It is saddening, what America has become, under Trump. This is not the proud warrior nation, free and brave, which stands by its allies.

    Most Americans will be repelled by Trump’s behavior. He will either be impeached or he will lose badly in 2020. His Syria decision was an epochal error.

    Wrong.

    58% of American voters back Trump's position, they are fed up of endless wars and the US always having to take the body bags and pay the defence bills.


    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars

    We would also be complete hypocrites attacking Trump having withdrawn British forces from Syria and Iraq.

    You really are blinded by the dangerous and absurd Trump. What happened to the moderate remain voting conservative
    Unless we are willing to send British troops to Syria we have no right lecturing Trump
    Of course we can attack Trump who is dangerous to peace
    No we can't, not unless we send British troops to support the Kurds
    Just reflect on that statement. You are saying we cannot attack Trump without involving our military

    You have lost it, sadly
    We cannot no, America has no divine obligation to be the world's policeman
    Of course we can attack Trump as many are tonight.

    He has acted in an irresponsible and crass manner and many innocents will pay a heavy price for his stupidity
    No we can't, unless British servicemen are sent to Syria to support the Kurds we have no right to criticise Trump whatsoever
    Tonight has shown you to be an unquestioning Trump Farage disciple

    I have every right to attack Trump and want him gone, yesterday would be too late

    He will not gain another term but he is likely to cause more mayhem as he is unstable and irrational and a real danger to the trade and peace
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,980


    BBC News - SNP formally backs decriminalisation of drugs
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50036173

    Drugs policy is reserved to Westminster.
    It is entirely typical of the SNP to have liberal policies on the things they don't control but to have authoritarian policies on the things they do.

    The Tory despots are out already, they will follow |SNP as usual. Their pol;icy is really working well , why change.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
    If you opposed the Iraq War and opposed action against Assad you are a hypocrite if you support US intervention now
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,774
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    Either you support a neocon agenda and US intervention in the Middle East or you don't

    Asking for a friend, is Trump hooring out US troops to Saudi Arabia for money part of a neocon agenda and US intervention in the Middle East?
    Trump is just protecting oil supplies
    That's a very neocon agenda - I thought you were just saying you did not support neocon agendas? Colour me confused.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Latest opinion poll from Spain ahead of next month’s election. Yet another hung Parliament beckons, but note the collapse of the Ciudadanos vote. Just a few months ago C’s was looking like it could become Spain’s second party, but a disastrous lurch to the right has brought it to the verge of extinction. It’s truly extraordinary.
    https://twitter.com/electograph/status/1183466282684948480?s=21

    Looks like Catalan nationalists may hold the balance of power which could mean an Independence referendum
    Didn't they hold the balance of power last time too? And their withdrawing of support is why we have an election?

    No, there was no agreement after the last election, which is why there’s a new one. It’s Spain’s fourth in four years! After this one, I suspect the remaining C’s MPs will abstain on a Sánchez presidency rather than vote against it, along with most of the regional parties. That will confirm PSOE in power, but it will be a fragile grip unless they can do a deal with Podemos.

    Any chance of going 5 in 5? Clearly they cannot get enough elections in Spain.

    I can’t see C’s wanting another election. I doubt they’ll vote against Sanchez’s inauguration this time. That should settle things down for a couple of years.

  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Noo said:

    Even people from fucking Lincolnshire should be allowed to vote here.

    I was with you until you made this ridiculous statement!!

    :D
    That was my trying to reach out to the enemy.
    Yes, the enemy. Lincolnshire is the devil's own county.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,980
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    It is saddening, what America has become, under Trump. This is not the proud warrior nation, free and brave, which stands by its allies.

    Most Americans will be repelled by Trump’s behavior. He will either be impeached or he will lose badly in 2020. His Syria decision was an epochal error.

    Wrong.

    58% of American voters back Trump's position, they are fed up of endless wars and the US always having to take the body bags and pay the defence bills.


    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars

    We would also be complete hypocrites attacking Trump having withdrawn British forces from Syria and Iraq.

    You really are blinded by the dangerous and absurd Trump. What happened to the moderate remain voting conservative
    Unless we are willing to send British troops to Syria we have no right lecturing Trump
    Of course we can attack Trump who is dangerous to peace
    No we can't, not unless we send British troops to support the Kurds

    We would do well to note Trump’s willingness to abandon America’s Kurdish allies to genocide and conclude that as long as he is in the Oval Office the US is not to be trusted.

    Trump is pursuing an 'America First' agenda much as Brexit was a vote for 'Britain First'.

    It was not a vote to be submerged in either the EU or USA

    Yes, Trump’s strategy is to allow the Turks to massacre Kurdish troops and civilians who at the US’s behest sacrificed so much to play a pivotal role in defeating ISIS, a key US strategic objective. Anyone who trusts Trump’s America is a fool.

    Except in reality it isn't given tonight Syrian forces are heading to join the Kurds to fight the Turks after a Deal between the Kurds and Assad.

    No real surprise as both oppose Turkey, the Kurds for obvious reasons and Assad due to Turkish support for the Syrian rebels.
    That’s a lot of hand waving away the betrayal of an ally, and killings and atrocities which are already happening.
    Northern Syria was a safe haven from both the Syrian regime and from Turkish incursion. By agreeing to allow a full scale invasion, Trump has forced the Kurds to choose between their enemies; it will not be a cost free choice.
    LOL, will Trump end up having to send thousands of troops to try and recover his disaster.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Until now I thought trump would pull off a victory next year, the economy would be bouncing back from a slowdown and overall he would be seen as "not as bad as the Dems say". After the Syria withdrawal I think he's not going to win, the Dems have the perfect stick to beat him with, stabbing the vanquishers of ISIS in the back will have gone down very, very badly with his base.

    I think he's done.

    58% of US voters back Trump's policy, including 69% of Republicans

    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars
    Really - you've already seen the post invasion polling ?

    As for the “endless wars”, I posted this below (which like most of the inconvenient rebuttals of you nonsense, you have ignored):

    “Putting an end to endless war doesn't mean ending American engagement around the world,“
    “Often, it means making sure we do our part to stabilize or help keep the peace, so that full-blown conflicts don't break out. Look at what's happened here. This isn't even a strategy or a policy. It is the president systematically destroying American alliances and American values. And that makes America worse off.“
    And where are the British forces supporting the Kurds then if you are so concerned? Answer nowhere
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    It is saddening, what America has become, under Trump. This is not the proud warrior nation, free and brave, which stands by its allies.

    Most Americans will be repelled by Trump’s behavior. He will either be impeached or he will lose badly in 2020. His Syria decision was an epochal error.

    Wrong.

    58% of American voters back Trump's position, they are fed up of endless wars and the US always having to take the body bags and pay the defence bills.


    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars

    We would also be complete hypocrites attacking Trump having withdrawn British forces from Syria and Iraq.

    You really are blinded by the dangerous and absurd Trump. What happened to the moderate remain voting conservative
    Unless we are willing to send British troops to Syria we have no right lecturing Trump
    Of course we can attack Trump who is dangerous to peace
    No we can't, not unless we send British troops to support the Kurds
    Just reflect on that statement. You are saying we cannot attack Trump without involving our military

    You have lost it, sadly
    We cannot no, America has no divine obligation to be the world's policeman
    Of course we can attack Trump as many are tonight.

    He has acted in an irresponsible and crass manner and many innocents will pay a heavy price for his stupidity
    No we can't, unless British servicemen are sent to Syria to support the Kurds we have no right to criticise Trump whatsoever
    Tonight has shown you to be an unquestioning Trump Farage disciple

    I have every right to attack Trump and want him gone, yesterday would be too late

    He will not gain another term but he is likely to cause more mayhem as he is unstable and irrational and a real danger to the trade and peace
    In my view Trump will get another term
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,774
    edited October 2019
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
    If you opposed the Iraq War and opposed action against Assad you are a hypocrite if you support US intervention now
    So despite your own direct experience of not supporting an action, and then switching 180 degrees and supporting it faithfully and passionately afterwards because the situation is different now, you cannot conceive of someone else being permitted to change their view based on the changed situation? That the first action having been taken, even though they did not want it, materially changes their stance later?

    Final quesiton then - why are you so special that you are allowed to do this, but others are not?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:


    Either you support a neocon agenda and US intervention in the Middle East or you don't

    Asking for a friend, is Trump hooring out US troops to Saudi Arabia for money part of a neocon agenda and US intervention in the Middle East?
    Trump is just protecting oil supplies
    That's a very neocon agenda - I thought you were just saying you did not support neocon agendas? Colour me confused.
    Neocon agendas are about regime change, Trump's agenda is America First
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,115
    edited October 2019
    malcolmg said:


    BBC News - SNP formally backs decriminalisation of drugs
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50036173

    Drugs policy is reserved to Westminster.
    It is entirely typical of the SNP to have liberal policies on the things they don't control but to have authoritarian policies on the things they do.

    The Tory despots are out already, they will follow |SNP as usual. Their pol;icy is really working well , why change.
    It is entirely typical of the LDs to have liberal policies when they're not in power but to enthusiastically adopt Tory policies when they get their sweaty little paws on a minor lever of power.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    malcolmg said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    It is saddening, what America has become, under Trump. This is not the proud warrior nation, free and brave, which stands by its allies.

    Most Americans will be repelled by Trump’s behavior. He will either be impeached or he will lose badly in 2020. His Syria decision was an epochal error.

    Wrong.

    58% of American voters back Trump's position, they are fed up of endless wars and the US always having to take the body bags and pay the defence bills.


    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars

    We would also be complete hypocrites attacking Trump having withdrawn British forces from Syria and Iraq.

    You really are blinded by the dangerous and absurd Trump. What happened to the moderate remain voting conservative
    Unless we are willing to send British troops to Syria we have no right lecturing Trump
    Of course we can attack Trump who is dangerous to peace
    No we can't, not unless we send British troops to support the Kurds

    We would do well to note Trump’s willingness to abandon America’s Kurdish allies to genocide and conclude that as long as he is in the Oval Office the US is not to be trusted.

    Trump is pursuing an 'America First' agenda much as Brexit was a vote for 'Britain First'.

    It was not a vote to be submerged in either the EU or USA

    Yes, Trump’s strategy is to allow the Turks to massacre Kurdish
    Except in reality it isn't given tonight Syrian forces are heading to join the Kurds to fight the Turks after a Deal between the Kurds and Assad.

    No real surprise as both oppose Turkey, the Kurds for obvious reasons and Assad due to Turkish support for the Syrian rebels.
    That’s a lot of hand waving away the betrayal of an ally, and killings and atrocities which are already happening.
    Northern Syria was a safe haven from both the Syrian regime and from Turkish incursion. By agreeing to allow a full scale invasion, Trump has forced the Kurds to choose between their enemies; it will not be a cost free choice.
    LOL, will Trump end up having to send thousands of troops to try and recover his disaster.
    He won't, the Syrian Army is already in Kurdistan tonight supporting the Kurds, leave them to it
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
    If you opposed the Iraq War and opposed action against Assad you are a hypocrite if you support US intervention now
    There was a nascent state of relative peace in northern Syria. Your man just waved the flag for a full blown war.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    It is saddening, what America has become, under Trump. This is not the proud warrior nation, free and brave, which stands by its allies.

    Most Americans will be repelled by Trump’s behavior. He will either be impeached or he will lose badly in 2020. His Syria decision was an epochal error.

    Wrong.

    58% of American voters back Trump's position, they are fed up of endless wars and the US always having to take the body bags and pay the defence bills.


    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars

    We would also be complete hypocrites attacking Trump having withdrawn British forces from Syria and Iraq.

    You really are blinded by the dangerous and absurd Trump. What happened to the moderate remain voting conservative
    Unless we are willing to send British troops to Syria we have no right lecturing Trump
    Of course we can attack Trump who is dangerous to peace
    No we can't, not unless we send British troops to support the Kurds
    Just reflect on that statement. You are saying we cannot attack Trump without involving our military

    You have lost it, sadly
    We cannot no, America has no divine obligation to be the world's policeman
    Of course we can attack Trump as many are tonight.

    He has acted in an irresponsible and crass manner and many innocents will pay a heavy price for his stupidity
    No we can't, unless British servicemen are sent to Syria to support the Kurds we have no right to criticise Trump whatsoever
    Tonight has shown you to be an unquestioning Trump Farage disciple

    I have every right to attack Trump and want him gone, yesterday would be too late

    He will not gain another term but he is likely to cause more mayhem as he is unstable and irrational and a real danger to the trade and peace
    In my view Trump will get another term
    Of course you do. As a disciple you cannot see any wrong in the man

    Fortunately, Americans can and he will be gone in 2020
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,774
    malcolmg said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    It is saddening, what America has become, under Trump. This is not the proud warrior nation, free and brave, which stands by its allies.

    Most Americans will be repelled by Trump’s behavior. He will either be impeached or he will lose badly in 2020. His Syria decision was an epochal error.

    Wrong.

    58% of American voters back Trump's position, they are fed up of endless wars and the US always having to take the body bags and pay the defence bills.


    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars

    We would also be complete hypocrites attacking Trump having withdrawn British forces from Syria and Iraq.

    You really are blinded by the dangerous and absurd Trump. What happened to the moderate remain voting conservative
    Unless we are willing to send British troops to Syria we have no right lecturing Trump
    Of course we can attack Trump who is dangerous to peace
    No we can't, not unless we send British troops to support the Kurds

    We would do well to note Trump’s willingness to abandon America’s Kurdish allies to genocide and conclude that as long as he is in the Oval Office the US is not to be trusted.

    Trump is pursuing an 'America First' agenda much as Brexit was a vote for 'Britain First'.

    It was not a vote to be submerged in either the EU or USA

    Yes, Tru

    Except in reality it isn't given tonight Syrian forces are heading to join the Kurds to fight the Turks after a Deal between the Kurds and Assad.

    No real surprise as both oppose Turkey, the Kurds for obvious reasons and Assad due to Turkish support for the Syrian rebels.
    That’s a lot of hand waving away the betrayal of an ally, and killings and atrocities which are already happening.
    Northern Syria was a safe haven from both the Syrian regime and from Turkish incursion. By agreeing to allow a full scale invasion, Trump has forced the Kurds to choose between their enemies; it will not be a cost free choice.
    LOL, will Trump end up having to send thousands of troops to try and recover his disaster.
    Well so long as they are not sent with the aim of regime change it won't be a neocon agenda and therefore ok.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
    If you opposed the Iraq War and opposed action against Assad you are a hypocrite if you support US intervention now
    There was a nascent state of relative peace in northern Syria. Your man just waved the flag for a full blown war.
    No he just withdrew US forces from Syria, if Turkey decides to attack Kurdistan having already backed Syrian rebels to destabilise the country with the support of previous US administrations and the Kurds then do a Deal with Assad that is up to them.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,774



    Of course you do. As a disciple you cannot see any wrong in the man

    Fortunately, Americans can and he will be gone in 2020

    I heartily disagree with HYUFD on many things, but I'm wary of being so confident that he will be gone in 2020, even with everything that has happened. The partisanship of the USA appears to be truly remarkable - even with our own escalation of it, we don't appear to be close to their levels, and in that situation the wrong democrat and a crap campaign, well, it doesn't seem like a victory can be ruled out.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    It is saddening, what America has become, under Trump. This is not the proud warrior nation, free and brave, which stands by its allies.

    Most Americans will be repelled by Trump’s behavior. He will either be impeached or he will lose badly in 2020. His Syria decision was an epochal error.

    Wrong.

    58% of American voters back Trump's position, they are fed up of endless wars and the US always having to take the body bags and pay the defence bills.


    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/us_military/most_agree_with_trump_s_withdrawal_from_endless_wars

    We would also be complete hypocrites attacking Trump having withdrawn British forces from Syria and Iraq.

    You really are blinded by the dangerous and absurd Trump. What happened to the moderate remain voting conservative
    Unless we are willing to send British troops to Syria we have no right lecturing Trump
    Of course we can attack Trump who is dangerous to peace
    No we can't, not unless we send British troops to support the Kurds
    Just reflect on that statement. You are saying we cannot attack Trump without involving our military

    You have lost it, sadly
    We cannot no, America has no divine obligation to be the world's policeman
    Of course we can attack Trump as many are tonight.

    He has acted in an irresponsible and crass manner and many innocents will pay a heavy price for his stupidity
    No we can't, unless British servicemen are sent to Syria to support the Kurds we have no right to criticise Trump whatsoever
    Tonight has shown you to be an unquestioning Trump Farage disciple

    I have every right to attack Trump and want him gone, yesterday would be too late

    He will not gain another term but he is likely to cause more mayhem as he is unstable and irrational and a real danger to the trade and peace
    In my view Trump will get another term
    Of course you do. As a disciple you cannot see any wrong in the man

    Fortunately, Americans can and he will be gone in 2020
    He will not be gone.

    Trump will be re elected next November in my view
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    @HYUFD
    I'm interested on your view on one thing in particular. Do you think Donald Trump works hard? I've heard it said he does, but then I've heard it said he spends a lot of time playing golf and watching TV. Not sure where the truth lies. Any ideas?
  • Options
    We were in New York at the time of the UN meetings three weeks ago and Trump's presence caused mayhem. The whole of 5th Avenue was closed together with most of the east side making the west side one long traffic jam

    The anger from the Americans we encountered was palpable and in some cases utter hatred for him.

    He will be gone next year but what a mess he will leave behind
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
    If you opposed the Iraq War and opposed action against Assad you are a hypocrite if you support US intervention now
    There was a nascent state of relative peace in northern Syria. Your man just waved the flag for a full blown war.
    No he just withdrew US forces from Syria, if Turkey decides to attack Kurdistan having already backed Syrian rebels to destabilise the country with the support of previous US administrations and the Kurds then do a Deal with Assad that is up to them.
    Are you a Russian agent of influence like your man in the White House ?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,774

    We were in New York at the time of the UN meetings three weeks ago and Trump's presence caused mayhem. The whole of 5th Avenue was closed together with most of the east side making the west side one long traffic jam

    The anger from the Americans we encountered was palpable and in some cases utter hatred for him.

    He will be gone next year but what a mess he will leave behind

    Not sure New York is fertile territory for Trump in the first place.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    58% of US voters back Trump's statement 'It is time for America to withdraw from endless wars, many of them tribal' and 'only fight where it is to our benefit' just 20% disagree.

    Except they weren’t fighting a war in northern Syria, so much as keeping the peace. US forces have taken a handful of casualties in the years they have been there.

    Trump has greenlighted the Turkish invasion of northern Syria, enabled Turkish atrocities against Kurdish civilians, cemented Russian influence in the Eastern Mediterranean, and cast doubt in every alliance the US has.
    All without consulting either the military of State Department beforehand.


    He has also made the rise of IS again more likely. Trump’s America is acting as a facilitator of terrorism - and the war crimes being committed by the Turks.



  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
    If you opposed the Iraq War and opposed action against Assad you are a hypocrite if you support US intervention now
    There was a nascent state of relative peace in northern Syria. Your man just waved the flag for a full blown war.
    No he just withdrew US forces from Syria, if Turkey decides to attack Kurdistan having already backed Syrian rebels to destabilise the country with the support of previous US administrations and the Kurds then do a Deal with Assad that is up to them.
    Are you a Russian agent of influence like your man in the White House ?
    If he was he'd have been waving the Brexit flag in 2016. HYUFD is more fanboi than Bolshoi.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,793
    edited October 2019
    Noo said:

    ...I haven't pushed the point in the discussions today, but I'm intrigued as to the distinction between those countries whose passport holders may vote here and those that may not. I'm not sure I understand how anyone can justify the difference, apart from the case of Ireland because of the GFA....

    The United Kingdom is a medieval kingdom with a Westphalian sovereign state grafted on top of it. So we have all the attributes of a modern state: defined borders, an executive overseen by the legislature, etc. But the workings are still those of a Middle Ages court, with a King, a Privy Council, the British Army (*not* the Army of the United Kingdom!) , Royal Navy, Civil Service and so on.

    So when the British Realm expanded past the borders of Great Britain and Ireland and kept going to become an Empire, the people living under it were all British subjects, and when democracy was grafted onto it those subjects attained the right to vote for the British Parliament.

    As the reach of the realm contracted back to these islands, the populations of the former colonies still loyal to the Crown retained that right. That right has been modified or withdrawn by the various Nationality Acts, but in many cases it is still true and so those populations may still hold it, even in the case of countries such as Ireland that now have their own Head of State.

    Think of it as a computer with a still-open backdoor due to the fact that the UK is still running Empire legacy code and hasn't been rebooted with a new operating system, just had the old interface tarted up to look posh.


  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Byronic said:

    nico67 said:

    Floater said:

    The main story on the BBC is that US forces are in retreat in the face of advancing Turkish forces.

    That would be Turkey, NATO ally.

    Allegedly Syria has agreed to assist the Kurds fight off Turkey.

    Which I assume means Russia is on board
    This is a complete disaster . Trumps action is one of the worst in recent history , utterly despicable and a shameful betrayal of the Kurds who have been instrumental in defeating ISIS.

    GOP: hang your heads in utter shame.
    I’ve been ranting about this for days. It might well be the end of Trump, even as he survives everything else.

    He has brought shame on the American military, and dishonored America itself, his patriotic base will hate this.
    They won't , they don't want any more body bags of American servicemen coming from the Middle East and given the British have withdrawn forces from Iraq and Syria we can hardly criticise
    As an aside, if an ISIS member who had previously been help prisoner by the Kurds commits a terrorist attack on US soil, how popular do you think President Trump's policy will be then?
    Given Trump's extremely tough immigration policy and ban on migrants and tourists to the US from many Middle Eastern countries that is unlikely
    Ummm.

    Do you think terrorists typically emigrate to the countries they plan on attacking?
    Under Trump's policy they cannot even go there to study or as tourists let alone to migrate
    Plenty of US targets outside the US. And plenty of ways of making it clear that any such attacks are a result of his actions in giving the green light to the Turks to invade.

    (Obviously I don’t want any attacks.)
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    viewcode said:

    Noo said:

    ...I haven't pushed the point in the discussions today, but I'm intrigued as to the distinction between those countries whose passport holders may vote here and those that may not. I'm not sure I understand how anyone can justify the difference, apart from the case of Ireland because of the GFA....

    The United Kingdom is a medieval kingdom with a Westphalian sovereign state grafted on top of it. So we have all the attributes of a modern state: defined borders, an executive overseen by the legislature, etc. But the workings are still those of a Middle Ages court, with a King, a Privy Council, the British Army (*not* the Army of the United Kingdom!) , Royal Navy, Civil Service and so on.

    So when the British Realm expanded past the borders of Great Britain and Ireland and kept going to become an Empire, the people living under it were all British subjects, and when democracy was grafted onto it those subjects attained the right to vote for the British Parliament.

    As the reach of the realm contracted back to these islands, the populations of the former colonies still loyal to the Crown retained that right. That right has been modified or withdrawn by the various Nationality Acts, but in many cases it is still true and so those populations may still hold it, even in the case of countries such as Ireland that now have their own Head of State.

    Think of it as a computer with a still-open backdoor due to the fact that the UK is still running Empire legacy code and hasn't been rebooted with a new operating system, just had the old interface tarted up to look posh.


    I'll file that under explanation rather than justification, but that's not to take anything away from it! What a wonderful theory.
    I have a feeling you'd enjoy The Shield of Achilles: War Peace and Course of History by Philip Bobbitt if you haven't already read it.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited October 2019

    We were in New York at the time of the UN meetings three weeks ago and Trump's presence caused mayhem. The whole of 5th Avenue was closed together with most of the east side making the west side one long traffic jam

    The anger from the Americans we encountered was palpable and in some cases utter hatred for him.

    He will be gone next year but what a mess he will leave behind

    Journalists found the same atmosphere in New York City the day after Trump won the 2016 election IIRC. 79% in the city voted for Clinton.

    https://abc7ny.com/politics/how-each-nyc-borough-voted-(hint-clinton-didnt-win-them-all)/1598306/
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    Even people from fucking Lincolnshire should be allowed to vote here.

    I was with you until you made this ridiculous statement!!

    :D
    That was my trying to reach out to the enemy.
    Yes, the enemy. Lincolnshire is the devil's own county.
    I think the Tory Party is fast becoming the devil's own party....

    Lincolnshire is that blank space on the map that no one ever goes to :)
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    Cyclefree said:



    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    58% of US voters back Trump's statement 'It is time for America to withdraw from endless wars, many of them tribal' and 'only fight where it is to our benefit' just 20% disagree.

    Except they weren’t fighting a war in northern Syria, so much as keeping the peace. US forces have taken a handful of casualties in the years they have been there.

    Trump has greenlighted the Turkish invasion of northern Syria, enabled Turkish atrocities against Kurdish civilians, cemented Russian influence in the Eastern Mediterranean, and cast doubt in every alliance the US has.
    All without consulting either the military of State Department beforehand.

    He has also made the rise of IS again more likely. Trump’s America is acting as a facilitator of terrorism - and the war crimes being committed by the Turks.

    He has also done much to make it more likely that one of the achievements of the 20th Century - the virtual ending of wars of territorial conquest - was very much a temporary one.

  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    Noo said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
    If you opposed the Iraq War and opposed action against Assad you are a hypocrite if you support US intervention now
    There was a nascent state of relative peace in northern Syria. Your man just waved the flag for a full blown war.
    No he just withdrew US forces from Syria, if Turkey decides to attack Kurdistan having already backed Syrian rebels to destabilise the country with the support of previous US administrations and the Kurds then do a Deal with Assad that is up to them.
    Are you a Russian agent of influence like your man in the White House ?
    If he was he'd have been waving the Brexit flag in 2016. HYUFD is more fanboi than Bolshoi.
    An agent of convenience.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,793
    Noo said:

    viewcode said:

    Noo said:

    ...I haven't pushed the point in the discussions today, but I'm intrigued as to the distinction between those countries whose passport holders may vote here and those that may not. I'm not sure I understand how anyone can justify the difference, apart from the case of Ireland because of the GFA....

    The United Kingdom is a medieval kingdom with a Westphalian sovereign state grafted on top of it. So we have all the attributes of a modern state: defined borders, an executive overseen by the legislature, etc. But the workings are still those of a Middle Ages court, with a King, a Privy Council, the British Army (*not* the Army of the United Kingdom!) , Royal Navy, Civil Service and so on.

    So when the British Realm expanded past the borders of Great Britain and Ireland and kept going to become an Empire, the people living under it were all British subjects, and when democracy was grafted onto it those subjects attained the right to vote for the British Parliament.

    As the reach of the realm contracted back to these islands, the populations of the former colonies still loyal to the Crown retained that right. That right has been modified or withdrawn by the various Nationality Acts, but in many cases it is still true and so those populations may still hold it, even in the case of countries such as Ireland that now have their own Head of State.

    Think of it as a computer with a still-open backdoor due to the fact that the UK is still running Empire legacy code and hasn't been rebooted with a new operating system, just had the old interface tarted up to look posh.


    I'll file that under explanation rather than justification, but that's not to take anything away from it! What a wonderful theory.
    I have a feeling you'd enjoy The Shield of Achilles: War Peace and Course of History by Philip Bobbitt if you haven't already read it.
    Probably. Unfortunately my TBR shelf (https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=#tbr ) is pretty much stacked for this year... :( Next year, perhaps
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    58% of US voters back Trump's statement 'It is time for America to withdraw from endless wars, many of them tribal' and 'only fight where it is to our benefit' just 20% disagree.

    Except they weren’t fighting a war in northern Syria, so much as keeping the peace. US forces have taken a handful of casualties in the years they have been there.

    Trump has greenlighted the Turkish invasion of northern Syria, enabled Turkish atrocities against Kurdish civilians, cemented Russian influence in the Eastern Mediterranean, and cast doubt in every alliance the US has.
    All without consulting either the military of State Department beforehand.

    He has also made the rise of IS again more likely. Trump’s America is acting as a facilitator of terrorism - and the war crimes being committed by the Turks.

    He has also done much to make it more likely that one of the achievements of the 20th Century - the virtual ending of wars of territorial conquest - was very much a temporary one.

    I despise Trump. Under him the US simply cannot be trusted.

    What a stupid stupid time to be alienating ourselves from our European neighbours.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    I’m slightly surprised that HYUFD know the lime he should be pushing, given the administration appears in some confusion about what it actually is:

    https://thehill.com/policy/defense/465494-furious-republicans-prepare-to-rebuke-trump-on-syria
    On Thursday, he raised the possibility of playing of mediator between Turkey and the Kurds, despite the fact that Trump’s retreat and Turkey’s incursion unraveled the previous U.S.-mediated plan for a safe zone.

    “We can mediate. I hope we can mediate,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

    His administration has also sought to change the narrative. A senior State Department official told reporters on a background call this past week that “we gave them a very clear red light,” while Esper told reporters Friday that “nobody greenlighted this operation” and insisted that “we have not abandoned the Kurds.”....
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    Cyclefree said:



    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    58% of US voters back Trump's statement 'It is time for America to withdraw from endless wars, many of them tribal' and 'only fight where it is to our benefit' just 20% disagree.

    Except they weren’t fighting a war in northern Syria, so much as keeping the peace. US forces have taken a handful of casualties in the years they have been there.

    Trump has greenlighted the Turkish invasion of northern Syria, enabled Turkish atrocities against Kurdish civilians, cemented Russian influence in the Eastern Mediterranean, and cast doubt in every alliance the US has.
    All without consulting either the military of State Department beforehand.


    He has also made the rise of IS again more likely. Trump’s America is acting as a facilitator of terrorism - and the war crimes being committed by the Turks.



    No that would be providing further aid to rebels trying to topple Assad, now ISIS has been defeated Trump is simply leaving Syria to Assad and the Kurds
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Nigelb said:

    Noo said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:


    Except they haven't got a different view.

    The 'Stop the War coalition' is not demanding we invade Syria to support the Kurds against Turkey

    But you cannot treat everyone who is objecting to the action as though they are Stop the War. But you are dismissing the validity of those objecting as though they are.

    The basic point is that one could have supported or opposed the interventions of a decade ago, or even of getting involved in Syria in the first place, and not be bound to a particular view of whether Trump's action was the right move in these circumstances, nor be a hypocrite.

    In the same way you did not vote Leave but now passionately believe the Leave vote must be delivered, someone could have opposed intervention in Syria but feel that, having done so, the present action is not the right course to take. Like you, they are not honour bound to support their previous position, if they consider the facts and circumstances mean another choice must be made. Whether that call is right or not is another matter, but it is not automatically hypocritcal.
    If you opposed the Iraq War and opposed action against Assad you are a hypocrite if you support US intervention now
    There was a nascent state of relative peace in northern Syria. Your man just waved the flag for a full blown war.
    No he just withdrew US forces from Syria, if Turkey decides to attack Kurdistan having already backed Syrian rebels to destabilise the country with the support of previous US administrations and the Kurds then do a Deal with Assad that is up to them.
    Are you a Russian agent of influence like your man in the White House ?
    If he was he'd have been waving the Brexit flag in 2016. HYUFD is more fanboi than Bolshoi.
    An agent of convenience.
    “Useful idiot” was Ilyich’s term I believe.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    58% of US voters back Trump's statement 'It is time for America to withdraw from endless wars, many of them tribal' and 'only fight where it is to our benefit' just 20% disagree.

    Except they weren’t fighting a war in northern Syria, so much as keeping the peace. US forces have taken a handful of casualties in the years they have been there.

    Trump has greenlighted the Turkish invasion of northern Syria, enabled Turkish atrocities against Kurdish civilians, cemented Russian influence in the Eastern Mediterranean, and cast doubt in every alliance the US has.
    All without consulting either the military of State Department beforehand.


    He has also made the rise of IS again more likely. Trump’s America is acting as a facilitator of terrorism - and the war crimes being committed by the Turks.



    No that would be providing further aid to rebels trying to topple Assad, now ISIS has been defeated Trump is simply leaving Syria to Assad and the Kurds
    You are utterly naive if you think that this hasn’t provided the perfect opportunity for IS to regroup and mutate.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    And just when you think things cannot get worse, Marvin the Paranoid Android died today.... :(

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50035065
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,008
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    58% of US voters back Trump's statement 'It is time for America to withdraw from endless wars, many of them tribal' and 'only fight where it is to our benefit' just 20% disagree.

    Except they weren’t fighting a war in northern Syria, so much as keeping the peace. US forces have taken a handful of casualties in the years they have been there.

    Trump has greenlighted the Turkish invasion of northern Syria, enabled Turkish atrocities against Kurdish civilians, cemented Russian influence in the Eastern Mediterranean, and cast doubt in every alliance the US has.
    All without consulting either the military of State Department beforehand.


    He has also made the rise of IS again more likely. Trump’s America is acting as a facilitator of terrorism - and the war crimes being committed by the Turks.



    No that would be providing further aid to rebels trying to topple Assad, now ISIS has been defeated Trump is simply leaving Syria to Assad and the Kurds
    You are utterly naive if you think that this hasn’t provided the perfect opportunity for IS to regroup and mutate.
    You were presumably advocating aid to Syrian rebels to fight Assad which led to the growth of ISIS in the first place. Your sanctimoniousness stinks.

    Now ISIS have been beaten Trump is simply refusing to keep US forces in Syria anymore, Assad has control of most of Syria again having beaten back the rebels and if the Kurds go to him for protection so be it.
  • Options
    dodradedodrade Posts: 595
    In theory, could Boris preempt the Benn Act by requesting a shorter extension this week before sending the letter the law requires him to do?
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,793
    dodrade said:

    In theory, could Boris preempt the Benn Act by requesting a shorter extension this week before sending the letter the law requires him to do?

    Don't give him ideas... :)
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,001
    HYUFD said:

    Now ISIS have been beaten Trump is simply refusing to keep US forces in Syria anymore, Assad has control of most of Syria again having beaten back the rebels and if the Kurds go to him for protection so be it.

    ISIS is not like Germany. It is a bunch of fanatical Islamic terrorists. They don't stop being fundemantalist crazies just because there is no state to call ISIS.

    On the contrary, they will look for ways to strike at the corrupt, decadent West.

    Thousands of ISIS prisoners will now fan out across the world. They will contact friendly Mosques in the UK and the US. Money will flow. As will the occasional document from someone who looks broadly similar. According to the New York Times, a Turkish passport with a US tourist visa can be bought on the Internet for less than $400.

    It's one thing to say "we're not going to support the Kurds anymore". That's well within the US's right, even if it might be foolish for the US to just dump its allies without notice. It's another to allow thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of hardened Islamic terrorists to go free.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Do people think that the use of a Queen's Speech as a pre-election party political broadcast is an innovation that is likely to be repeated by future governments?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,655
    edited October 2019
    Flavible is up and running again after an update.

    https://flavible.co.uk/userprediction
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897
    dodrade said:

    In theory, could Boris preempt the Benn Act by requesting a shorter extension this week before sending the letter the law requires him to do?

    But the first request will be taken in context with the Benn Act. The EU and the 27 Governments know what has gone on in the HoC just as much as we do.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    BBC News reports the Kurds have agreed an alliance with the Syrian Government against the Turks and Syrian government forces are now heading for Northern Syria

    Your man Trump is a disaster of untold dimensions
    Did Trump invade Iraq? No, he opposed the war.

    Did Trump back rebel forces against Assad in Syria? No.

    Trump is just doing what the left wanted the USA to do a decade ago and withdrawing US troops from the Middle East
    And do you ever stop to even consider if that was a good thing to do in this situation or not? Rather than a political game about who said what when about a general position about intervention?

    Obviously matters can be very complicated, and its why I am genuinely curious what policy benefits Trump expected for the United States through his action, and if he is happy with the outcome. Clearly I do not like Trump, but I am trying to be objective and to understand what he hoped to gain from this. If it was a cold, even brutal decision but in a ruthless way a practical benefit to his nation I can understand that, even if I do not approve of that decision. But I would like to understand it, and not see the question avoided because of either like or dislike of the man.

    But to think the matter can just be covered by consideration of comments made a decade ago, even though repeated since, as if that absolves any need to reflect any further? Not for the first time I struggle to even comprehend why that is a defence.
    ..
This discussion has been closed.