Why Americans are Saying 'No'

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by Marlowe, Sep 10, 2013.

  1. Stuart Wolfe

    Stuart Wolfe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    14,967
    Likes Received:
    11,255
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Have a defense though? I mean, when was the UK's last gasp at greatness - putting down the Falklands? :roflol:

    Look, I'm AGREEING with you - the UK and to a lesser degree Europe couldn't do a thing about any international hotspots that pop up. Isn't that what you wanted? A military that can't do a thing against anyone else? That can't go out and fight against a country you might agree with on a philisophical level? Well, now you have it. Congratulations :applause:

    The only downside is that you haven't accepted what comes with it, that Europe is for all intents and purposes living on the fumes of it's former glory. A location that acts great but has nothing to back it up. It is essentially the national equivalent of Al Bundy, a middle-aged guy selling shows in a strip mall while always dreaming of his days in high school when he made four touchdowns in a single game.

    So yeah, most of us here in the US have no problem with some random UK poster calling America an international golem, a pawn of Israel, the blood-soaked killer of universes, the source of all evil in the multiverse, Galactus wearing Old Glory as an apron, the Legion of Doom with a Black Lex Luthor, stuff like that. Because we also know it's the online equivalent of an old toothless poodle on a chain barking at the driver of a Classic V-8 Ford Mustang as it zooms down the road. It amounts to nothing but that poodle sure thinks highly of itself and that driver doesn't have the heart to prove it otherwise.

    And it's why I'm all for bringing our boys home. Because there's no reason for us to be there. None. What's the point of wasting our money to defend some toothless old poodle Europe? And if some military issue come up in Europe - well, Europeans think they're all so much more enlightened than we are - you guys take care of it.

    Can't see why you'd disagree.
     
  2. Jack Napier

    Jack Napier Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Messages:
    40,439
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not for the first time you seem to believe that being the most murderous is something to feel 'exceptional' or proud of.

    How tragic.
     
  3. Stuart Wolfe

    Stuart Wolfe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    14,967
    Likes Received:
    11,255
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Told you already Jack - I agree with you (and by extension AllegoricalFact since she's the one who convinced me of this) - it's a good thing that the UK is militarily sterile. You have what you wanted. Why is this a bad thing? We will have world peace when the US, Russia, China, and the Mid-East is as powerless as the UK, and by extension, Europe. You blokes have taken the first step. Good show!

    And my main point was that the US should pull out of Europe as the military serves no purpose there. Let Europe defend itself. You've made it clear enough you have no fondness for us, and I certainly think our presence there is a waste of perfectly good money.

    Don't you think we should leave? And if not, why?
     
  4. Jack Napier

    Jack Napier Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Messages:
    40,439
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Of course I do.

    Get the hell out of Europe and esp Germany.

    Take your blood stained bases etc with you.

    Go.

    And never come back.

    And bow before your Talmudic Jewish masters and their killer Islamist sects.

    I would see it as part of(but not all of), a cleansing process for Europe.
     
  5. Art_Allm

    Art_Allm Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,003
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Well, Lord Ismay explained the goal of NATO in plain English:

    "To keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down."

    Well, there is no SU any more, but there are still Russians that must be kept out, and there are still Germans that must be kept down.

    If they do not keep the Americans in, the Germans down and the Russians out, how can the bankers be sure that Germans and Russians will not create an alliance?

    Will this alliance be good for the globalist agenda?
     
  6. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think it has to do with them being scapegoated, sometimes not undeservedly, by EVERYBODY over the centuries. Still not a justification for NOW.
     
  7. Art_Allm

    Art_Allm Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,003
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Did any Warsaw-Pact government ask for the withdrawal of Soviet forces, dude?
     
  8. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think Americans should oppose a strike on Syria just because our GIs have been lied to WAAAAY to much over the last 15 years. They deserve a break from Netanyahu on the neocons.
     
  9. Stuart Wolfe

    Stuart Wolfe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    14,967
    Likes Received:
    11,255
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I totally agree. It would certainly help our domestic economy as well. Why should our soldiers spend their money in some European tourist trap when they can spend it in ours? :smile:
     
  10. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,187
    Likes Received:
    62,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yep, the either your with us or against us days are behind us

    .
     
  11. CaptainAngryPants

    CaptainAngryPants New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,745
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    False comparison, but keep trying.
     
  12. misterveritis

    misterveritis Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,862
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    This *is* great news!
     
  13. Art_Allm

    Art_Allm Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,003
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Well, if you ask the people in the western countries, then you will find out that the overwhelming majority believes that the Yankees should go home.

    In the Warsaw Pact countries this was hardly the case.

    But the puppet EU-governments do not represent the opinion or the interests of their people, they know what they have to say, because they want to be re-elected.
     
  14. CaptainAngryPants

    CaptainAngryPants New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,745
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Did you conduct that poll personally? Or are you just making stuff up again?
     
  15. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    0
    and the majority do not want war.

    I saw a weird poll on tv over the weekend. The claim was that 1 in 10 (10%) of americans polled, did not trust congress.

    That is scary.

    That is like suggesting that the american public does not trust the people leading the country.

    Imagine if you were a kind hearted mind and saw that only 10% of syrians, wanted assad in power.

    Is it even possible that only 10% of americans trust their congress?


    .
     
  16. Jack Napier

    Jack Napier Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Messages:
    40,439
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Might I suggest the other 90% need a slap with a wet towel then?
     
  17. Art_Allm

    Art_Allm Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,003
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Even in official polls most voters say that they want Americans to go home NOW!.

    Less than 30% of voters believe that Yankees should stay in Europe.
    In reality the number of supporters is even smaller.

    So why are American troops still in Europe?
    Because EU-Politicians do not represent the opinion of their voters, which is a prove that "democracy" is just a silly joke.
     
  18. CaptainAngryPants

    CaptainAngryPants New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,745
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well then I guess you'd better get busy mobilizing public opinion so you can turn it into political action. Otherwise it's just a poll and a bunch of talk.
     
  19. Bishadi

    Bishadi Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,292
    Likes Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    0
    please do
     
  20. Art_Allm

    Art_Allm Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,003
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I am busy educating Americans, and I hope that they will awake from their spiritual slumber sooner or later.

    Their country is (like predicted by Nixon) going down the drain and they are universally hated because of their little "special friend".
     
  21. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    33,372
    Likes Received:
    36,882
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Time to Defund the Syrian Rebels

    Now that they’ve officially joined al-Qaeda



    http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2013/09/26/time-to-defund-the-syrian-rebels/


    Those cuddly "moderate" Syrian rebels are at it again! No sooner had the President, John Kerry, John McCain and Lindsey Graham assured us the majority of those "freedom fighters" are really the equivalent of George Washington and the Continental Army, than the rebels commanders on the ground announced they were joining al-Qaeda. They are through with the "National Council" and are organizing their own "Islamist Alliance":

    "The al-Qaeda-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra, designated a terrorist organization by the United States, is the lead signatory of the new group … Others include the Tawheed Brigade, the biggest Free Syrian Army unit in the northern city of Aleppo; Liwa al-Islam, the largest rebel group in the capital, Damascus; and Ahrar al-Sham, the most successful nationwide franchise of mostly Syrian Salafist fighters. Collectively, the new front, which does not yet have a formal name but has been dubbed by its members the ‘Islamist Alliance,’ claims to represent 75 percent of the rebels fighting to topple Assad."

    In this context, the al-Qaeda affiliates aren’t even the worst. As Max Fisher puts it in the Washington Post:

    "As a sign of how bad things have gotten, al-Nusra is actually somewhere near the ideological center of the rebel movement; the al-Qaeda group Islamic State (ISIS), whose fighters are streaming into Syria from Iraq are considerably more ideologically extreme."

    Yes, you read that right: a group that has pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda is composed of "moderates" who represent the "center" of the rebel movement, while those baddies over at ISIS are the Real Problem. Once you go down this rabbit hole, you wind up in a kind of Syrian Wonderland, where things get curiouser and curiouser.

    There we learn this radicalization is the fault of those unreliable Americans, who have "betrayed" the rebels by not bombing and failing to arm them with the really big guns. According to Syrian National Council spokesman Louay al-Mokdad, "they told us they signed this because they lost all hope in the international community. They said: ‘We are really tired, Bashar al-Assad is killing us, all the West is betraying us, and they want to negotiate with the regime over our blood.’"

    Yes, those poor babies are tired – after all, beheading infidels really takes it out of you! It’s hard on the arms. Burning churches, destroying entire villages, not to mention car-bombs – what could be more exhausting? I mean, have a heart!

    Besides which, the Islamists are among the best fighters, according to Abu Hassan, who speaks for a gang of thugs calling itself the Tawheed Brigade:

    "Jabhat al-Nusra is a Syrian military formation that fought the regime and played an active role in liberating many locations. So we don’t care about the stand of those who don’t care about our interests."

    So does this mean our recently stepped-up effort to arm the rebels is a non-starter? Not so fast: President Obama recently signed a waiver exempting the Syrian rebels from a law prohibiting US aid to terrorist groups. So it’s okay! The coast is clear! It’s all "legal" – US tax dollars will continue to flow to Syria, where they’ll be used to arm a group that has the official al-Qaeda franchise and wants to create an Islamic state.

    Oh, but we’re "vetting" the Syrian opposition, right? Well, yeah, if you call this "vetting." It’s really more like the honor system – and, call me cynical, but somehow I don’t think getting "handwritten receipts" from local commanders will work with these folks.

    I had to laugh at our clueless government’s reaction to this latest development in the ongoing Syrian rebel saga:

    "The development appeared to take the Obama administration by surprise. A senior State Department official, briefing reporters Tuesday night on a meeting at the United Nations between Secretary of State John F. Kerry and Syrian Opposition Coalition Chairman Ahmad al-Jarba, was unaware of the rebel announcement that had been made several hours earlier."

    Looks like the State Department was tied up with this and just didn’t notice they’d been outflanked by Ayman al-Zawahiri. However, by the next morning they were totally up to speed:

    "In a statement Wednesday, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that officials had ‘seen the reports’ and were ‘discussing with the moderate opposition what impact this will have going forward.’ … U.S. aid would continue, she said, ’taking into account that alliances and associations often change on the ground based on resources and needs of the moment.’"

    Ah yes, the "needs of the moment" – that about sums up Washington’s reckless by-the-seat-of-our-pants foreign policy. But what else do you expect from a government that goes bankrupt every few months and threatens to shut down altogether? Surely not competence. A nation that boasts of its ability to deliver "precision" missile strikes has no idea where millions of dollars in "foreign aid" is going – except, perhaps, straight into the coffers of the same people who brought down the World Trade Center on 9/11.

    Is it really incompetence? I wonder. The last time we played the regime change game in the region, we sent portable surface-to-air missile units to the Afghan mujahideen, i.e. what later became al-Qaeda and the Taliban. But, hey, didn’t we declare war on those guys more recently? I seem to remember an authorization for the use of military force that specifically named al-Qaeda and allied groups as justification for a worldwide "war on terrorism" – a war that continues to this day. So how do we reconcile this with the Obama administration’s support for our sworn enemies?

    This deranged policy isn’t unique to the Obamaites: it’s a continuation of the Sunni "turn" initiated by the Bush administration. Bogged down in Iraq, and facing rising opposition to the war on the home front, they had to come up with a solution – i.e. a "victory" – but quick. So the "surge" was born, coupled with "outreach" to Iraq’s Sunni tribesman (i.e. we bribed them). Having "won" the battle of Anbar province with the help of these worthies, we declared the operation a success.

    Team Bush had by that time already decided to ditch Iraq and go after the Big Kahuna, i.e. Iran – and that meant forging a regional alliance of Sunni radicals, oil-rich Emirs, and the Saudi Kingdom. As Fisher reports, al-Qaeda represents the "centrist" element in this sinister mix.

    That’s how we got here, i.e. to the point where the ghost of Osama bin Laden is cheering on Uncle Sam. He may be dead as a doornail, but he’s had the last laugh.

    The Syrian rebels have spent the past year or so blaming America for their inability to win the civil war they started, and issuing all kinds of threats, including threats to attack the US.

    Their suit-and-tie advocates are subtle about it, warning of the "consequences of inaction." What are these consequences? They’ve been threatening to go over to al-Qaeda for months. One rebel apologist opined that if the West failed to send arms, Syria would become "a jihadist magnet." The clear implication being that the rebels would take their jihad to other shores.

    Israel is right next door, which is why their amen corner has joined up with the Saudi/Qatari-financed pro-rebel lobby, but what’s scary is that America would hardly be exempt. After all, the oft-stated goal of al-Qaeda – otherwise known as Syrian "centrists" – has always been to strike at the "far enemy," i.e. the United States, and, from the sound of things, they wouldn’t have much trouble persuading their newest Syrian recruits to join them in this effort. We "betrayed" them, and they’re pretty mad about it – but are they mad enough to ram a car bomb into an American shopping mall?

    In short, what the rebels have been saying, usually implicitly and under their breath, has been: send us money and arms, or else run the risk of another 9/11. In deciding to arm the rebels and call for air strikes against the Syrian regime, the Obama administration is responding to what is in effect a blackmail note.

    It all works out very neatly for both sides: the rebels get their guns, and the administration gets a fresh justification for the Surveillance State, because, you know, the Bad Guys really are out to get us. Yes, war is a racket, as Gen. Smedley Butler famously opined, but more than just money is involved.

    In their statement, the Islamist Alliance not only rejected the Syrian Opposition Council and called for the imposition of Islamic law, they also demanded the rebels reject Western aid. Why not grant them their wish?

    Millions of US taxpayer dollars are being spent to support and arm them – and does anybody in Congress know how much is going to our avowed enemies? With 75 percent of the rebel fighters on the ground pledging allegiance to this "Islamist Alliance," anything less than that would be astonishing. If even one dollar is going to these murderous goons it’s a moral obscenity.

    Now is the time for some enterprising member of congress with a nose for news to pounce on this issue and introduce a bill to defund the rebels. The House of Representatives could do it as part of a budget deal – that is, if they don’t shut down the government first. Because something tells me that if the government does shut down, US aid to Obama’s contras will keep flowing – even if a few of our air traffic controllers are told to stay home.




    -------------




    It is no secret that the USA has funded its enemies whether it be the Zionist terrorist state of Israel or the al-Qaeda terrorists.


    Now that Americans are fully aware of all this, it's time to send our troops home and to end all these treasonous foreign entanglements.
     
  22. Idealistic Smecher

    Idealistic Smecher Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2013
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Does Antiwar.com still have a podcast?
     
  23. RevAnarchist

    RevAnarchist New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 22, 2010
    Messages:
    9,848
    Likes Received:
    158
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ha! When he was elected and the first years of his presidency the freaking world loved Obama and as did his american supporters. They loved him nearly like a God! Not just Americans. Europeans, especially the leftist PC bush bashing types slathered so much praise on him that it was awful embarrassing especially since my extended family is from France. In many posts here on PF I and other conservative leaning* members said Obama was going to destroy the USA, spending trillions here trillions there like the USA had unlimited treasury! Well maybe considering the printing press monopoly money dollar the USA does have unlimited but worthless dollars. In any case It was obvious that Obama was lying through his teeth and was the USAs worst nightmare coming across as the American dream.

    That said I did NOT see him being a war monger though, I thought he would be an appeaser. So I suppose I will have to trade in my old crystal ball for a new one. Or maybe my failure to see Obamas true hawkish nature had nothing to do with the supernatural but rather it is that psychopaths are notoriously unpredictable and near impossible to ‘read‘. Ok maybe psychopath is a little much, maybe it’s a lesser affliction, say squandermania ?

    * I do lean conservative but vote the issues not the party, like the party really still exists.

    reva
     
  24. misterveritis

    misterveritis Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,862
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Perhaps he is both. He appeases our real enemies and takes thenation to war, if and only if, it will hurt the US or its allies.

    The establishment Republican party is not conservative. It is socialist-lite. They are all statists.

    The real fight, using Article V of the Constitution now moves to the state legislatures. This is our chance to restore the Constitution and defeat the national government. To restore America we must return to a Federal government.
     
  25. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    33,372
    Likes Received:
    36,882
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male


    http://antiwar.com/radio/



    lots of good info
     

Share This Page