World Politics

[Unchained]

Re: Re:

....please define, in your opinion, progressive in the current political context ( and please include a word or two where that progressive would "sit" politically in today's political pantheon ).....

Tolerance over repression
Dialogue over conflict
Spending on society over spending on 'defense'
Openness (media, politics, industry dealings, etc.) over smoke and mirrors

You think Putin is doing a good job there?

I have not spoken to a large group of Russian citizens of many different age groups and varied social standings. The @10 or so that I have spoken with often for hours all repeated one thing. Older Russians yearn for order..like the good old days. Putin's lack of openness is actually a desired trait to many Russians.
I am not sure if it was anybody's job to control him or his political growth.
His dealings are pretty straight forward in many ways.. very open. Put up or shut up.
. Syria, rebel groups within his country, sea lanes, oil exploration,and now the hacking accusations. He basically,openly says shut the #uck up and nobody has chit to say about it. When he takes over territory, threatens his neighbors the world..the UN say and say and say but do nothing,zip.
In my opinion Obama's biggest chump move was not enforcing the crossing of the line in the sand but drawing it in the first place.
If Putin is a punk than what is everybody else?

 

[movingtarget]

Re: Re:

....please define, in your opinion, progressive in the current political context ( and please include a word or two where that progressive would "sit" politically in today's political pantheon ).....

Tolerance over repression
Dialogue over conflict
Spending on society over spending on 'defense'
Openness (media, politics, industry dealings, etc.) over smoke and mirrors

You think Putin is doing a good job there?

I have not spoken to a large group of Russian citizens of many different age groups and varied social standings. The @10 or so that I have spoken with often for hours all repeated one thing. Older Russians yearn for order..like the good old days. Putin's lack of openness is actually a desired trait to many Russians.
I am not sure if it was anybody's job to control him or his political growth.
His dealings are pretty straight forward in many ways.. very open. Put up or shut up.
. Syria, rebel groups within his country, sea lanes, oil exploration,and now the hacking accusations. He basically,openly says shut the #uck up and nobody has chit to say about it. When he takes over territory, threatens his neighbors the world..the UN say and say and say but do nothing,zip.
In my opinion Obama's biggest chump move was not enforcing the crossing of the line in the sand but drawing it in the first place.
If Putin is a punk than what is everybody else?

As many political commentators have noted before ; hesitation and indecisiveness only emboldens Putin. You saw it in Syria and Crimea and it's obvious in the past 12 months Putin is trying to strut more on the world stage. I am sure that if Obama has his time over again he would have done things differently. That is why the USA is nervous about Trump especially the military because his views on China and Russia are very different as we have already seen but then the USA fears China more than Russia and Putin has been the beneficiary of that. Whether Trump's attitude to Russia changes remains to be seen. There will be plenty of pressure on him not to get too friendly.

 

[Jagartrott]

Re: Re:

....please define, in your opinion, progressive in the current political context ( and please include a word or two where that progressive would "sit" politically in today's political pantheon ).....

Tolerance over repression
Dialogue over conflict
Spending on society over spending on 'defense'
Openness (media, politics, industry dealings, etc.) over smoke and mirrors

You think Putin is doing a good job there?

....you really gotta get off that Putin obsession thingee you is caught up in 'cause there was nothing, real or implied, in my post about Cousin Vlad....

I was talking about Putin and the love he seems to be generating with some here - you replied to that.
Even if homophobia was his only vice, I would still never be able to support him.

Good. How's that going to be implemented? Especially the "openness"?

That's deflection.

...nah that was most definitely a question...it even has one of these "?" things at the end....and in the middle too...so lots of those "?" things , which should have been a pretty big clue....

It was deflection. You ask how I saw progressive, I answered. The implementation is a different discussion - again, my orginal post was about what I highlighted above.

And, oh, no need to be patronizing.

 

[python]

....file under, well lookee here....

DAMASCUS – According to two reports coming out of Aleppo today, at least 14 US Coalition military officers were captured this morning in an East Aleppo bunker by Syrian Special Forces.

This story was quietly leaked by Voltaire.net, who announced, “The Security Council is sitting in private on Friday, December 16, 2016, at 17:00 GMT, while NATO officers were arrested this morning by the Syrian Special Forces in a bunker in East Aleppo.”

Fares Shehabi MP, a prominent Syrian Parliamentarian and head of Aleppo’s Chamber of Commerce published the names of the Coalition officers on his Facebook page on the 15th December (emphasis added):

Mutaz Kanoğlu – Turkey
David Scott Winer – USA
David Shlomo Aram – Israel
Muhamad Tamimi – Qatar
Muhamad Ahmad Assabian – Saudi
Abd-el-Menham Fahd al Harij – Saudi
Islam Salam Ezzahran Al Hajlan – Saudi
Ahmed Ben Naoufel Al Darij – Saudi
Muhamad Hassan Al Sabihi – Saudi
Hamad Fahad Al Dousri – Saudi
Amjad Qassem Al Tiraoui – Jordan
Qassem Saad Al Shamry – Saudi
Ayman Qassem Al Thahalbi – Saudi
Mohamed Ech-Chafihi El Idrissi – Moroccan

In addition to Voltaire.net, the other original report was provided by Damascus-based Syrian journalist Said Hilal Alcharifi. According to Alcharifi, captured “NATO” officers were from a number of member states including the US, France, Germany and Turkey, as well as Israel. Here is his statement (translated from French):

“Thanks to information received, Syrian authorities discovered the headquarters of high ranking western/NATO officers in the basement of an area in East Aleppo and have captured them alive. Some names have already been given to Syrian journalists, myself included. The nationalities are US, French, British, German, Israeli, Turkish, Saudi, Moroccan, Qatari etc. In light of their nationalities and their rank, I assure you that the Syrian government have a very important catch, which should enable them to direct negotiations with the countries that have tried to destroy them.”

Although these initial reports describe the individuals in question as “NATO” officers, it’s unlikely they would have been carrying NATO colors on a covert operation – and might be more accurately labeled as US Coalition officers. Note that early reports suggest that these are not standard ‘street rebel’ or jihadi terrorists but actual Coalition military personnel and field commanders

....if this turns out to be true....hmmm, some interesting possibilities could rear their ugly heads....and circle of losers could become much larger....

http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/12/16/reports-at-least-10-nato-military-officers-captured-by-syrian-special-forces-this-morning-in-east-aleppo-bunker/

Cheers

indeed, interesting...

having been swimming and trying not to drawn in the fake news seas, my 1st thought was literally WHY is the reporter of the breaking news is not one of those we are so used to from the west's msm 'speaking under the condition of not being named' ? the 2nd thought if Said Hilal Alcharifi was his real name ?

since i never read him or of him, i went where everyone would as a 1st step. the google. sure enough. one can like or dislike his articles, but he's a real person, an aleppo based journalist with his picture widely available.

my 3d thought was, look, i am not going to jump and believe everything this Said Hilal wrote, but why the feck i was NEVER treated to a fraction of the similar transparency by the 'white helmets' or the london-based 'syria human rights watch' ? these 2 are the main source of the virtually ALL western msm news about aleppo...never i saw a single varifiable name of their sources...

i am probably an idiot asking stupid questions...that's why i will go back to contemplating a few exciting xc ski races to start soon.

at least i am sure i will get real answers to my stooopid question THERE

 

[blutto]

IMF chief Christine Lagarde found guilty of negligence

Paris: Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), was found guilty on Monday of criminal charges linked to the misuse of public funds during her time as France's finance minister, a verdict that could force her out of her post.

Lagarde, who began her second five-year term at the IMF in February, will not face any jail time, the judge said. The scandal has overshadowed her work at the fund, to which she was appointed in 2011 after Dominique Strauss-Kahn resigned as managing director when he was accused of having sexually assaulted a maid in a New York City hotel.

The move is likely to destabilise the IMF as it faces a host of thorny issues, including questions over its participation in a multibillion-dollar bailout for Greece and uncertainty about the role of the US in the organisation once Donald Trump becomes president in January.

The verdict was a surprise, after the prosecutor in the trial said last week the case against her was "very weak" and did not appear to be enough to win a conviction. It is a theme prosecutors have previously repeated

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/world-business/imf-chief-christine-lagarde-found-guilty-of-negligence-20161219-gteiq3.html

Cheers

 

[blutto]

Re: Re:

....please define, in your opinion, progressive in the current political context ( and please include a word or two where that progressive would "sit" politically in today's political pantheon ).....

Tolerance over repression
Dialogue over conflict
Spending on society over spending on 'defense'
Openness (media, politics, industry dealings, etc.) over smoke and mirrors

You think Putin is doing a good job there?

....you really gotta get off that Putin obsession thingee you is caught up in 'cause there was nothing, real or implied, in my post about Cousin Vlad....

I was talking about Putin and the love he seems to be generating with some here - you replied to that.
Even if homophobia was his only vice, I would still never be able to support him.

Good. How's that going to be implemented? Especially the "openness"?

That's deflection.

...nah that was most definitely a question...it even has one of these "?" things at the end....and in the middle too...so lots of those "?" things , which should have been a pretty big clue....

It was deflection. You ask how I saw progressive, I answered. The implementation is a different discussion - again, my orginal post was about what I highlighted above.

And, oh, no need to be patronizing.

....don't think there is any great "love" for Putin here.....though some may find the lack of rabid dislike of Putin that some seem to have to be tantamount to "love"....but I guess that is an entirely different issue and for those folks I say YMMV....

....and good luck dealing with your Putin obsession....it seems to be in a very advanced stage and could lead to some real trouble in accurately viewing reality...

Cheers

 

[python]

..a pretty sad set of news before the Christmas.

the terror and violence, don't even know if the outbreak is the right word, has just killed an ambassador, a bunch of civilians in berlin and almost succeeded at the us ankara embassy...the only common btwn all these acts was that the perpetrators had either arabic or muslim sounding names. i don't want to make any far reaching conclusions, but those that like to refer to a 'judeo-christian world' must have taken a note...

on a positive side, a potential positive, as we now know for a fact, the unprecedented turkish, iranian and russian cooperation was why the violence in aleppo has almost stopped. call it the liberation or a fall, but the saved civilians don't give a fukc.

encouraging and interesting was that the us and the west in general were absent at the aleppo negotiations. i am encouraged, b/c each time the us was 'almost signing' something and then telling the world indignantly 'we are walking out', the violence in aleppo raged.

that's why i am looking forward to a meeting scheduled for TODAY btwn the for. ministers of turkey, iran and russia. again, no one issued an invitation to the honorable lame fukc kerry. he was obviously a waste of everyone's time.

 

[djpbaltimore]

If you are judged by the company that you keep, not getting an invite from that rogue's gallery is pretty encouraging.

 

[Brullnux]

The attacker on Berlin is still at large, may not have even been an Islamist. In fact, no terrorist group has yet taken responsibility for it, which is weird because they usually immediately announce it. What's going on?

Edit: ISIS have just taken responsibility, but no proof. I can't remember if they normally do or not, does anyone know if they usually have evidence of carrying out attacks?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Probably just a world wide bunch of angry Christmas shoppers.

 

[movingtarget]

Re:

The attacker on Berlin is still at large, may not have even been an Islamist. In fact, no terrorist group has yet taken responsibility for it, which is weird because they usually immediately announce it. What's going on?

Edit: ISIS have just taken responsibility, but no proof. I can't remember if they normally do or not, does anyone know if they usually have evidence of carrying out attacks?

They usually do take responsibility. They feed off the fear of course. I heard that ISIS had claimed responsibility and it was very similar to the Nice attack unless he was a copy cat loner which sometimes happens. Lots of angry disillusioned people out there. But ISIS attacks are usually suicide missions and this one is on the run so that is different. There was doubt that the guy they captured was the killer.

 

[movingtarget]

Re:

..a pretty sad set of news before the Christmas.

the terror and violence, don't even know if the outbreak is the right word, has just killed an ambassador, a bunch of civilians in berlin and almost succeeded at the us ankara embassy...the only common btwn all these acts was that the perpetrators had either arabic or muslim sounding names. i don't want to make any far reaching conclusions, but those that like to refer to a 'judeo-christian world' must have taken a note...

on a positive side, a potential positive, as we now know for a fact, the unprecedented turkish, iranian and russian cooperation was why the violence in aleppo has almost stopped. call it the liberation or a fall, but the saved civilians don't give a fukc.

encouraging and interesting was that the us and the west in general were absent at the aleppo negotiations. i am encouraged, b/c each time the us was 'almost signing' something and then telling the world indignantly 'we are walking out', the violence in aleppo raged.

that's why i am looking forward to a meeting scheduled for TODAY btwn the for. ministers of turkey, iran and russia. again, no one issued an invitation to the honorable lame fukc kerry. he was obviously a waste of everyone's time.

What are meetings going to achieve now ? Maybe it's about corpse removal ? As for Arabic sounding people killing others, yes the Turk who killed the Russian ambassador was a Muslim and there is a high probability that the the Berlin killer was the same. I don't think anyone is suspecting Christians or Buddhists.

 

[python]

Re:

Edit: ISIS have just taken responsibility, but no proof. I can't remember if they normally do or not, does anyone know if they usually have evidence of carrying out attacks?

based on my following of the three middle east centred sources (al jazeera, eye on middle east, al monitor) when isil claimed their responsibility it was almost always confirmed by the investigators later.

What are meetings going to achieve now ?

it remains to be seen what they can accomplish. what's rather obvious now is that the west and the us wont be able to 'accomplish' what they managed in iraq, lybia and afghanistan - changing the regimes (no question, brutal), but creating in stead a chaos which begot the isil and with which the west and the us are still struggling.

it's an alternative scenario where the new stake holders to the eventual solution are the countries either immediately neighboring syria or close enough to care about the mess. they aren't altruistic, for sure, but unlike the us hypocritical high ground claims, they may have a real, down to earth concern for the neighborhood flames engulfing them. i see a big difference. in the motivation. in the drive to affect a solution, however imperfect. if achieved, at least in terms of starting to talk constructively - about the future governance, about a transition mechanics, about the country's unity/federation...- then fewer people in syria will die.

that's something to hope for.

the western alternative, as any reasonable observer has to admit, has failed miserably.

 

[movingtarget]

Re: Re:

Edit: ISIS have just taken responsibility, but no proof. I can't remember if they normally do or not, does anyone know if they usually have evidence of carrying out attacks?

based on my following of the three middle east centred sources (al jazeera, eye on middle east, al monitor) when isil claimed their responsibility it was almost always confirmed by the investigators later.

What are meetings going to achieve now ?

it remains to be seen what they can accomplish. what's rather obvious now is that the west and the us wont be able to 'accomplish' what they managed in iraq, lybia and afghanistan - changing the regimes (no question, brutal), but creating in stead a chaos which begot the isil and with which the west and the us are still struggling.

it's an alternative scenario where the new stake holders to the eventual solution are the countries either immediately neighboring syria or close enough to care about the mess. they aren't altruistic, for sure, but unlike the us hypocritical high ground claims, they may have a real, down to earth concern for the neighborhood flames engulfing them. i see a big difference. in the motivation. in the drive to affect a solution, however imperfect. if achieved, at least in terms of starting to talk constructively - about the future governance, about a transition mechanics, about the country's unity/federation...- then fewer people in syria will die.

that's something to hope for.

the western alternative, as any reasonable observer has to admit, has failed miserably.

The Middle East is such a mess. Who would have thought that after Iraq and Afghanistan, another country would be pretty much destroyed. Then you have the smaller conflicts in Libya and a few other countries and even terrorist attacks in Jordan ! Little wonder that Obama was dilly dallying and apprehensive about being too deeply involved in another conflict. The USA either should have stayed out of it altogether or jumped in before Russia got involved, by taking the middle ground in a complex situation with so many groups with different enemies and allies didn't really have much effect at all. Even their air war was not having much effect until Russia also became involved and ramped it up. Of course the UN view of that is probably a lot different to the view of Assad and Putin or Obama. A ground war is riskier for the soldiers but an intense air war always means an increase in civilian casualties especially when the enemy lines are not clear cut.

 

[python]

Re: Re:

movingtarget:

... Little wonder that Obama was dilly dallying and apprehensive about being too deeply involved in another conflict. The USA either should have stayed out of it altogether or jumped in before Russia got involved, by taking the middle ground in a complex situation with so many groups with different enemies and allies didn't really have much effect at all.....

the obama admin will be history in a matter of days. as i said already, his syria approach/strategy has failed and it's hardly arguable. why it turned out the way it did and where the american mistakes were made is still to be sorted out.

international politics and diplomacy have 2 sides - one is open to the public (and is very messy by definition), and the other side is secret, covert where the cards played are kept tight. my point is that what we were told by obama/kerry wrt syria isn't a full story. not even close...there may have been either embarrassing (like dealings to certain jihadists) or downright mistaken/incorrect assessments (like WHO committed the chemical attacks). for instance, why the us stubbornly insisted on the nondisclosure of their deal with russia on aleppo ? considering such possibilities, perhaps the obama reluctance to step in with the bang should be viewed as may have known more and better that we were told ? then, perhaps he should be credited for NOT enforcing the 'red line' or for NOT expending the americann soldiers lives defending the saudi cutthroats in aleppo ??

Lack of a bully headlong rush into a war we have seen so often from the obama predecessors may have been a wise decision. and when the russians stepped in, perhaps obama was relieved but continued saber rattling b/c that's what a superpower supposed to do to mask its deliberate lack of leadership..

that all said, i am personally not convinced that obama failed in the middle east completely. his opening to iran and the firm standing to the zionist attacks on the political non proliferation process was a huge success imo.

 

[blutto]

....file under how to "cover" a war and get the "coverage" you want....and which gives folks like Busted and dj the material they need to sell the story as informed and concerned citizens of the world.....and we are the Russian Stooges ....

....and something python mentioned several posts ago about where the majority of info about Aleppo is really coming from....and this article nicely maps out the program that gives the Syria Human Rights Watch and Bellingcat their "sources"....

my 3d thought was, look, i am not going to jump and believe everything this Said Hilal wrote, but why the feck i was NEVER treated to a fraction of the similar transparency by the 'white helmets' or the london-based 'syria human rights watch' ? these 2 are the main source of the virtually ALL western msm news about aleppo...never i saw a single varifiable name of their sources...

....and the article below....

Unconventional Warfare: Killing Journalists Creates "Media Activist"

As pointed out yesterday, a recent tweet series by Club des Cordeliers made some interesting observation about the #StandWithAleppo propaganda campaign:

The "Stand with Aleppo" campaign in the U.S. was started and is propelled by a Democratic party operative who is also CEO of a public relations company and "strategic affairs consultant" in Chicago, Becky Carroll.

The Cordeliere made some additional remarks on anti-Syria propaganda. These about the U.S. directed Information Warfare campaign from inside Syria. This leads me to the thoughts below about the U.S. waged Unconventional Warfare in Syria and how it may be responsible for the elimination of "neutral" journalists on the ground.

We start with Club des Cordeliers remarks on the video campaign coming out of Syria and currently especially out of east-Aleppo:

US State Dep't has openly trained Syrian "activists" in social media propaganda techniques since 2012. U.S. Embassy Geneva, Aug 21, 2012 U.S. Equipment, Training Reaching Syrian Opposition:
The State Department has $25 million in nonlethal assistance that it can use for training purposes, and [State Department spokeswoman Victoria] Nuland said “a broad cross section of activists” inside Syria and in neighboring countries is benefiting from an “extremely active” U.S. training effort that is focused on Syrians who have not left their country.

“We are doing training on free media, countering the government’s circumvention technology, legal and justice and accountability issues, and how to deal with the crimes that have been committed during this conflict, programs for student activists who are encouraging peaceful protest on the university campuses, [and] programs for women,” Nuland said.

She added that the State Department has been working for years with Syrians and others on ways to counter Internet censorship, as well as supporting Syrian human rights and justice programs.

US trained Syrian contra propagandists via seminars conducted in Istanbul. St.Louis Public Radio, Dec 3, 2012 U.S. Steps Up Aid (But No Arms) To Syrian Exiles:

Syrian "activists" given electronic equipment & technical instruction in State Dep't-sponsored Istanbul trainings. Wired, Oct 25, 2012 Exclusive: U.S. Rushes to Stop Syria from Expanding Chemical Weapon Stockpile:

U.S. intelligence agencies are believed to be helping with the training of opposition groups, while the Pentagon denies shipping arms to the rebels. In public, American aid has largely been limited to organizational advice (Washington is trying to set up a council of opposition leaders in Doha in the next few weeks, for instance) and technical assistance. Several hundred Syrian activists have traveled to Istanbul for training in secure communications, funded by the U.S. State Department. The rebel leaders received tips on how to leapfrog firewalls, encrypt their data, and use cellphones without getting caught, as Time magazine recently reported. Then they returned to Syria, many of them with new phones and satellite modems in hand.

To NATO military strategists, social media propaganda is element of "winning the online information war" in Syria. Small Wars Journal, Apr 26, 2016 The Impact of Cyber Capabilities in the Syrian Civil War:

A recent piece by Patrick Cockburn in the Independent points to the mass of propaganda about and out of Syria, mostly U.S. directed as shown above, and explains why we only see and hear this and nothing else: There's more propaganda than news coming out of Aleppo this week:

[T]he jihadis holding power in east Aleppo were able to exclude Western journalists, who would be abducted and very likely killed if they went there, and replace them as news sources with highly partisan “local activists” who cannot escape being under jihadi control.
...
The precedent set in Aleppo means that participants in any future conflict will have an interest in deterring foreign journalists who might report objectively. By kidnapping and killing them, it is easy to create a vacuum of information that is in great demand and will, in future, be supplied by informants sympathetic to or at the mercy of the very same people (in this case the jihadi rulers of east Aleppo) who have kept out the foreign journalists. Killing or abducting the latter turns out to have been a smart move by the jihadis because it enabled them to establish substantial control of news reaching the outside world.

We have to see the killing and kidnapping of journalists as a (secret) part of the arsenal of the Unconventional Warfare and the U.S. created propaganda storm out of Syria.

If one intends to give a maximum effect to the propaganda output of ones proxies in an Information Warfare operation, it makes great sense to eliminate all other potential sources of information from the wider warzone. Thus - the abduction and killing of neutral professional journalists is a conscious process that enables their replacement with ones own Information Warfare assets. I believe we have seen such a process in Syria.

A similar process was applied earlier when the U.S. invaded Iraq. News outlets that gave a different than the official U.S. view were targeted by U.S. military forces. The Al-Jazeerah offices in Baghdad were bombed by the U.S. military. (The White House even considered bombing the Al-Jazeerah head office in Doha, Qatar.) Wikileaks published a video which showed a U.S. helicopter killing Reuters staffers. Only journalists embedded with the U.S. military were protected against U.S. military action. Their reports were naturally heavily skewed towards the official U.S. propaganda view

.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/12/unconventional-warfare-killing-journalists-creates-media-activist-domination.html#more

Cheers

 

[movingtarget]

Re: Re:

movingtarget:

... Little wonder that Obama was dilly dallying and apprehensive about being too deeply involved in another conflict. The USA either should have stayed out of it altogether or jumped in before Russia got involved, by taking the middle ground in a complex situation with so many groups with different enemies and allies didn't really have much effect at all.....

the obama admin will be history in a matter of days. as i said already, his syria approach/strategy has failed and it's hardly arguable. why it turned out the way it did and where the american mistakes were made is still to be sorted out.

international politics and diplomacy have 2 sides - one is open to the public (and is very messy by definition), and the other side is secret, covert where the cards played are kept tight. my point is that what we were told by obama/kerry wrt syria isn't a full story. not even close...there may have been either embarrassing (like dealings to certain jihadists) or downright mistaken/incorrect assessments (like WHO committed the chemical attacks). for instance, why the us stubbornly insisted on the nondisclosure of their deal with russia on aleppo ? considering such possibilities, perhaps the obama reluctance to step in with the bang should be viewed as may have known more and better that we were told ? then, perhaps he should be credited for NOT enforcing the 'red line' or for NOT expending the americann soldiers lives defending the saudi cutthroats in aleppo ??

Lack of a bully headlong rush into a war we have seen so often from the obama predecessors may have been a wise decision. and when the russians stepped in, perhaps obama was relieved but continued saber rattling b/c that's what a superpower supposed to do to mask its deliberate lack of leadership..

that all said, i am personally not convinced that obama failed in the middle east completely. his opening to iran and the firm standing to the zionist attacks on the political non proliferation process was a huge success imo.

The trouble with Iran is Trump who seems to be very pro Israel. Normally I would have said that Obama achieved something good but with Trump to follow I think there is apprehension about what will happen and I'm sure that the South China Sea situation won't continue as is. Israel never listened to any advice about building new settlements and provoking the Palestinians. Their responses to terrorist incidents were often over the top and Obama and Israel were really in a war of words over Iran. Iran has also won big in Syria. It's also inconceivable that China will be allowed to continue doing what it wants in neutral waters without provocation from the USA and I am sure the USA will expect it's allies to also exercise their rights where China wants no one to go. Many commentators seem to think that Obama did well with Iran while failing badly in Syria. He was in a very difficult situation in Syria. We will soon see whether Trump really will take a lower profile on the world stage and concentrates more on the domestic side of things like he constantly says. Obama does not believe that Trump will weaken NATO or international alliances. Trump is such a political novice that no one really knows what to expect although some of his brain dead commentary must cause concern especially in foreign affairs. Will he be as impulsive as he seems or will he actually take advice from experienced advisors and it's also arguable whether the team he has put together will be effective as some of his appointments are curious at best. He seems to believe more in business success than he does in expert analysis and political experience. The first 12 months could be interesting.

 

[Bustedknuckle]

Re: Re:

movingtarget:

... Little wonder that Obama was dilly dallying and apprehensive about being too deeply involved in another conflict. The USA either should have stayed out of it altogether or jumped in before Russia got involved, by taking the middle ground in a complex situation with so many groups with different enemies and allies didn't really have much effect at all.....

the obama admin will be history in a matter of days. as i said already, his syria approach/strategy has failed and it's hardly arguable. why it turned out the way it did and where the american mistakes were made is still to be sorted out.

international politics and diplomacy have 2 sides - one is open to the public (and is very messy by definition), and the other side is secret, covert where the cards played are kept tight. my point is that what we were told by obama/kerry wrt syria isn't a full story. not even close...there may have been either embarrassing (like dealings to certain jihadists) or downright mistaken/incorrect assessments (like WHO committed the chemical attacks). for instance, why the us stubbornly insisted on the nondisclosure of their deal with russia on aleppo ? considering such possibilities, perhaps the obama reluctance to step in with the bang should be viewed as may have known more and better that we were told ? then, perhaps he should be credited for NOT enforcing the 'red line' or for NOT expending the americann soldiers lives defending the saudi cutthroats in aleppo ??

Lack of a bully headlong rush into a war we have seen so often from the obama predecessors may have been a wise decision. and when the russians stepped in, perhaps obama was relieved but continued saber rattling b/c that's what a superpower supposed to do to mask its deliberate lack of leadership..

that all said, i am personally not convinced that obama failed in the middle east completely. his opening to iran and the firm standing to the zionist attacks on the political non proliferation process was a huge success imo.

The trouble with Iran is Trump who seems to be very pro Israel. Normally I would have said that Obama achieved something good but with Trump to follow I think there is apprehension about what will happen and I'm sure that the South China Sea situation won't continue as is. Israel never listened to any advice about building new settlements and provoking the Palestinians. Their responses to terrorist incidents were often over the top and Obama and Israel were really in a war of words over Iran. Iran has also won big in Syria. It's also inconceivable that China will be allowed to continue doing what it wants in neutral waters without provocation from the USA and I am sure the USA will expect it's allies to also exercise their rights where China wants no one to go. Many commentators seem to think that Obama did well with Iran while failing badly in Syria. He was in a very difficult situation in Syria. We will soon see whether Trump really will take a lower profile on the world stage and concentrates more on the domestic side of things like he constantly says. Obama does not believe that Trump will weaken NATO or international alliances. Trump is such a political novice that no one really knows what to expect although some of his brain dead commentary must cause concern especially in foreign affairs. Will he be as impulsive as he seems or will he actually take advice from experienced advisors and it's also arguable whether the team he has put together will be effective as some of his appointments are curious at best. He seems to believe more in business success than he does in expert analysis and political experience. The first 12 months could be interesting.

If he makes it that far. Conflicts from him and Tillerson are going to be front and center from day one(assuming tillerson gets approved, which I doubt).

don is pro Israel, pro russia, russia is pro iran, who is anti Israel. tillerson is going to try to undo sanctions against russia, with don's help, to help Exxon-Mobil..cya tillerson.

 

[Starstruck]

Look at what the Russians have done with their depleted uranium munitions:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=depleted+uranium&espv=2&biw=1242&bih=602&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwi0vrDyx4XRAhUW0WMKHXgVDN0Q_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=depleted+uranium+children

 

[Irondan]

Re:

Look at what the Russians have done with their depleted uranium munitions:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=depleted+uranium&espv=2&biw=1242&bih=602&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwi0vrDyx4XRAhUW0WMKHXgVDN0Q_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=depleted+uranium+children

That is disturbing.......

 

[Starstruck]

Re: Re:

Look at what the Russians have done with their depleted uranium munitions:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=depleted+uranium&espv=2&biw=1242&bih=602&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwi0vrDyx4XRAhUW0WMKHXgVDN0Q_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=depleted+uranium+children

That is disturbing.......

It is, as is the howling hypocrisy.
Fallujah 12 years on: Americans ‘last people to consider’ generations crippled by depleted uranium
https://www.rt.com/news/365671-fallujah-depleted-uranium-us/

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

Look at what the Russians have done with their depleted uranium munitions:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=depleted+uranium&espv=2&biw=1242&bih=602&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwi0vrDyx4XRAhUW0WMKHXgVDN0Q_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=depleted+uranium+children

That is disturbing.......

It is, as is the howling hypocrisy.
Fallujah 12 years on: Americans ‘last people to consider’ generations crippled by depleted uranium
https://www.rt.com/news/365671-fallujah-depleted-uranium-us/

I don't disregard what this article says as being untrue, but citing RT (Russian government) brings no credibility to these claims.

 

[Starstruck]

Take your pick:
https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=depleted%20uranium%20weapons

 

[Irondan]

Re:

Take your pick:
https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=depleted%20uranium%20weapons

Thanks for clarifying!

 

[Scott SoCal]

Re: Re:

movingtarget:

... Little wonder that Obama was dilly dallying and apprehensive about being too deeply involved in another conflict. The USA either should have stayed out of it altogether or jumped in before Russia got involved, by taking the middle ground in a complex situation with so many groups with different enemies and allies didn't really have much effect at all.....

the obama admin will be history in a matter of days. as i said already, his syria approach/strategy has failed and it's hardly arguable. why it turned out the way it did and where the american mistakes were made is still to be sorted out.

international politics and diplomacy have 2 sides - one is open to the public (and is very messy by definition), and the other side is secret, covert where the cards played are kept tight. my point is that what we were told by obama/kerry wrt syria isn't a full story. not even close...there may have been either embarrassing (like dealings to certain jihadists) or downright mistaken/incorrect assessments (like WHO committed the chemical attacks). for instance, why the us stubbornly insisted on the nondisclosure of their deal with russia on aleppo ? considering such possibilities, perhaps the obama reluctance to step in with the bang should be viewed as may have known more and better that we were told ? then, perhaps he should be credited for NOT enforcing the 'red line' or for NOT expending the americann soldiers lives defending the saudi cutthroats in aleppo ??

Lack of a bully headlong rush into a war we have seen so often from the obama predecessors may have been a wise decision. and when the russians stepped in, perhaps obama was relieved but continued saber rattling b/c that's what a superpower supposed to do to mask its deliberate lack of leadership..

that all said, i am personally not convinced that obama failed in the middle east completely. his opening to iran and the firm standing to the zionist attacks on the political non proliferation process was a huge success imo.

The trouble with Iran is Trump who seems to be very pro Israel. Normally I would have said that Obama achieved something good but with Trump to follow I think there is apprehension about what will happen and I'm sure that the South China Sea situation won't continue as is. Israel never listened to any advice about building new settlements and provoking the Palestinians. Their responses to terrorist incidents were often over the top and Obama and Israel were really in a war of words over Iran. Iran has also won big in Syria. It's also inconceivable that China will be allowed to continue doing what it wants in neutral waters without provocation from the USA and I am sure the USA will expect it's allies to also exercise their rights where China wants no one to go. Many commentators seem to think that Obama did well with Iran while failing badly in Syria. He was in a very difficult situation in Syria. We will soon see whether Trump really will take a lower profile on the world stage and concentrates more on the domestic side of things like he constantly says. Obama does not believe that Trump will weaken NATO or international alliances. Trump is such a political novice that no one really knows what to expect although some of his brain dead commentary must cause concern especially in foreign affairs. Will he be as impulsive as he seems or will he actually take advice from experienced advisors and it's also arguable whether the team he has put together will be effective as some of his appointments are curious at best. He seems to believe more in business success than he does in expert analysis and political experience. The first 12 months could be interesting.

If he makes it that far. Conflicts from him and Tillerson are going to be front and center from day one(assuming tillerson gets approved, which I doubt).

don is pro Israel, pro russia, russia is pro iran, who is anti Israel. tillerson is going to try to undo sanctions against russia, with don't help, to help Exxon-Mobil..cya tillerson.

Soooooo, in the history of (U.S.) Republic only nine times have cabinet choices not been confirmed once the process starts. Only once since 1959 and never has a Secretary of State choice been bounced during the confirmation process.

Dems don't control one iota of the process and unless Tillerson has some crazy stuff that has yet to be uncovered he'll be the next SoS no matter what the fake news disseminators are saying.