Syrian Civil War Developments

[Double Edge]

I'm absolutely sure that George W. Bush had nothing but the best of intentions in invading Iraq. I take him at his word, and that he's being 100% honest when he says why he did it. He literally thought Al-Qaeda was there, Husseinite Iraq was an imminent threat, and he also thought that God came to him in a dream and he had a vision of a free Iraq with liberty and justice for all.

No joke, I'm not being sarcastic at all.

I look at Iraq as two phases.

Not much disagreement about the invasion. Forget what the opposition thinks, they lost the vote.

However lots of disagreement about the occupation and this includes those that were for the invasion

Mistake the media makes is commingling both of those phases. Cannot go on about occupation and then question the invasion.

This is the dominant narrative we hear isn't it, the opposition asking was it worth it bla bla.

I'm more or less referring to regular type people, who just want to keep their head down, live the best they can, keep a roof over their head, keep their wife happy, and keep their children fed, whether it's the rickshaw driver in Bengaluru, the sarariman in Nippon, the Irish-American construction worker building a Manhattan skyscraper in the US, or the DJ at the Berlin discotheque mixing music and dropping the bass.

it's funny but ALL of those people have an opinion about Iraq or any war, just isn't articulated very well

Can't have a conversation unless we have a few peer reviewed reasons as to why it started in the first place.

[Ironduke]

Of course it's what we do here. :-)

I'm more or less referring to regular type people, who just want to keep their head down, live the best they can, keep a roof over their head, keep their wife happy, and keep their children fed, whether it's the rickshaw driver in Bengaluru, the sarariman in Nippon, the Irish-American construction worker building a Manhattan skyscraper in the US, or the DJ at the Berlin discotheque mixing music and dropping the bass.

[Double Edge]

Best just not to think about all the angles and contradictions, you'd be literally trying to think through with thousands of them. Just deal with the consequences in the best way possible.

No can do. It's what we do in this place : D

Not thousands, just a handful of important ones that get that all important vote to prosecute a war. To get buy in from allies etc

Hard job figuring them out. Answers come later or rather stronger reasons.

btw , Here is where i attempt to engage with people about this alternative routes but it doesn't get very far

think there was another place but can't remember where

[Ironduke]

Some people just can't let go of the 'for the oil' pretext for every war...

tried to dig into this pipeline and competing whatnot a while back here and nothing conclusive came out of it

[RambleMode]
[CaptainObviousMode]

The problem is that virtually all people, everywhere in the world, fallaciously try to conclude that there's just one reason for their actions, the actions of other persons, and so on.

There is never just one reason for an action, whether by an individual or a group of persons. Cognitive dissonance, deniability, avoidance of feelings of guilt, etc. are among the primary reasons why most people fallaciously settle on that one single reason.

If you're dealing with an action of an individual, there might be ten, fifteen, or twenty reasons for an action. Some reasons are consistent, some are complementary, others are contradictory. You get a group of people together behind an action, the number of reasons multiply exponentially.

I'm absolutely sure that George W. Bush had nothing but the best of intentions in invading Iraq. I take him at his word, and that he's being 100% honest when he says why he did it. He literally thought Al-Qaeda was there, Husseinite Iraq was an imminent threat, and he also thought that God came to him in a dream, and he had a vision of a free Iraq with liberty and justice for all.

No joke, I'm not being sarcastic at all.

You throw in guys like Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, they all have their own angles. You got the oil guy, you got the neo-conservative/neo-liberal Wilsonians who want to re-make the world in America's image.

Best just not to think about all the angles and contradictions, you'd be literally trying to think through with thousands of them. Just deal with the consequences in the best way possible.

But that being said, the "this happened/I did this for this one single reason" is the biggest fallacy one can commit. If it matters, or it interests you, think it through. If it doesn't affect you, it's none of your business, or it's not your job, it doesn't even matter. Just go to work, put food in the cupboard, and pay your rent.

[/RambleMode]
[/CaptainObviousMode]

[Double Edge]

People say a lot of things. Even brilliant people who are experts in their fields can turn out to be completely wrong. People have a tendency to look for patterns, and assume that the future will follow current trend lines.

Some people just can't let go of the 'for the oil' pretext for every war...

tried to dig into this pipeline and competing whatnot a while back here and nothing conclusive came out of it

[Versus]

Well, that figures it. The LNG and CNG bonanza was just a clamp until TAP becomes operational, that is why US is rushing us to recognize Kosovo and it explains current events regarding Syria.

[snapper]

There is an interview on the web, regarding 2018 and the energy crisis and in that interview it is said that 2018 is the point of no return for diversification of Eu supplies. I am trying desperately to find that interview but so far no luck. It was on youtube.

Alot of Gazprom's European contracts are up for renewal next year.

[Ironduke]

There is an interview on the web, regarding 2018 and the energy crisis and in that interview it is said that 2018 is the point of no return for diversification of Eu supplies. I am trying desperately to find that interview but so far no luck. It was on youtube.

People say a lot of things. Even brilliant people who are experts in their fields can turn out to be completely wrong. People have a tendency to look for patterns, and assume that the future will follow current trend lines.

[Versus]

There is an interview on the web, regarding 2018 and the energy crisis and in that interview it is said that 2018 is the point of no return for diversification of Eu supplies. I am trying desperately to find that interview but so far no luck. It was on youtube.

[Versus]

Cheeto Benito appears to be backtracking:

Never said when an attack on Syria would take place.
Could be very soon or not so soon at all!
In any event, the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS.
Where is our “Thank you America?”

Narcissistic sociopath is bad combination.

At least he spelling "ridding" correctly.

Like,share,subscribe :)))))

[astralis]

1.WTH does it matter if Assad used chems or not?He allegedly used them before with nothing of relevance happening.Chems did not saved him from defeat nor gave him victory,conventional forces did.Plus Assad has won this round.If one wants to remove him,they better get ready for a different sort of war.

general deterrence against chem usage is worthy. i think we've demonstrated that we're generally fine with people slaughtering other people as long as they do it conventionally. international norms.

it is only a scratch for his forces.

so, if chems did not save him from defeat nor give him victory, why use chems at all?

limited message. US need not kick out Assad nor have an "end goal" to send a limited message.

for that matter the endless round of slaughter isn't necessarily to US disadvantage. Russians have blown considerably more blood in Syria than the US has, ISIS is slaughtered, Hezbollah is bleeding, Assad is bleeding, what's not to like? sucks that the Kurds are bleeding i guess.

[Mihais]

Which is a good thing.

Now how about actually thinking through all this.First,I some folks here don't like their President,which ain't my concern.The guy's actions are relevant.Hopefully,trolling the Russians and NOT shooting missiles is what he does.
1.WTH does it matter if Assad used chems or not?He allegedly used them before with nothing of relevance happening.Chems did not saved him from defeat nor gave him victory,conventional forces did.Plus Assad has won this round.If one wants to remove him,they better get ready for a different sort of war.

2.What does it matter if US et pals bomb Assad?Assuming every missile is a perfect hit,zero interference from the Russians etc...it is only a scratch for his forces. And it won't go smoothly because intel is never perfect,plus the SAA is already dispersed.

So,why act hysterical?

3.What the heck is the end goal?After 7 years there isn't one tangible and realistic for the ME as a whole and Syria in particular.Unless arming AQ was one.And making a mess of everything.Which serves fundamentally the interests of powers hostile to US.You waste time,money and blood for nothing.

[astralis]

so.....was that a red line? hah!

[Officer of Engineers]

Problem is now finding suitable targets. Trump's belicose allowed the Syrians and the Russians to disburse but I don't anyway around that. This has to be an international response, read UK and France, which would result in the exact same kind of forewarning. Attacking factories ain't going to do any good. They're using cholrine which is needed as disinfection agent, ie bleach. Chlorine is not illegal. Weaponizing chlorine is and can be done on base and not at a factory.

I see the only time was to destroy T4 two-three days out max from the chlorine attack to actually hurt the Syrians but then, that would deny gathering the actual intelligence to make a proper assessement of the attack, never mind gathering international support.

[TopHatter]

That's not the point, point is the irony of human progress. Counting down...4hrs. Can't wait to reach Crimean War in my analysis. I have a slight suspicion that today's events are re run from those times.

Cheeto Benito appears to be backtracking:

Never said when an attack on Syria would take place.
Could be very soon or not so soon at all!
In any event, the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS.
Where is our “Thank you America?”

Narcissistic sociopath is bad combination.

At least he spelling "ridding" correctly.