US Defense Secretary Mattis Resigns

Dev1lXYZ

Member
Sep 1, 2017
635
378
220
Lolol. What a 180 Trumpets are doing. What happened to all that love for Mad Dog Mattis and us raining hell on Isis. "Oh no we hated Mattis all along!!!1". Right...

Trump shoots himself in the foot to enable Democrat policies. Hey, I'll take it.
We rained hell on ISIS. They are scatted to the wind. Matt is did his job. We are getting out and Assad/Russia/Turkey can deal with the remnants. Troops halved in Afghanistan. No more need for Mad Dag Mattis.
 

MDS

Neo Member
Oct 8, 2018
47
82
115
Weird how Trump the pacifist has significantly expanded the drone strike program and shoveled money at the Pentagon. Must be an oversight.
Well yeah. Any president is forced to compromise with existing powers and theres no one more powerful in Washington then the CIA and the Pentagon. Fed off Cold War and then WoT money, they've both metastasized to where it would take an exceptionally powerful president to really reign in their growth and Trump has not been that guy (nor has any past president in decades or any other future foreseeable president).

Withdrawing troops from Syria has been his first significant push back against their power (the only significant one they've had in awhile), and it has triggered a political crisis. The American public has always strongly been against troops in Syria and both of the presidents its happened under have been personally against troops in Syria. Yet it happened and ending it is provoking a struggle. Thats the power of the Pentagon and CIA. The democratic branches are only just barely able to have any effect on their growth and only at a cost. So no shit that an embattled president would put big pleasing numbers in spending bills to try to keep them happy. As seen by the recent accounting scandal that disappeared from the news in record time, the Pentagon and CIA can ultimately treat the funding sent to them by Congress as mere suggestions.
 
Last edited:

Zangiefy360

Member
Aug 30, 2018
588
972
230
Mattis did a heck of a job, but it doesn't mean he needs to stay on forever.

He stayed on for 700 days, which is typical for a Secretary of Defense.

But just like how a business changes its executive team as the business changes its strategy, President Trump is doing the same.
 
Last edited:

12Goblins

Member
Mar 1, 2017
714
454
255
We rained hell on ISIS. They are scatted to the wind. Matt is did his job. We are getting out and Assad/Russia/Turkey can deal with the remnants. Troops halved in Afghanistan. No more need for Mad Dag Mattis.
can't tell if you are serious, or seriously misinformed ...
 

Zangiefy360

Member
Aug 30, 2018
588
972
230
Yes. I also remember when Mattis still defended Obama's nuclear deal with Iran.

Doubtful that Mattis will reflect back on Trump's foreign policy as positively.
Obama's foreign policy was a complete bait-and-switch. President Trump's is still a work in progress, but so far he's made more progress than Bush and Obama combined, in two years no less.

He's ended two wars: Syria and Korea.
He's winding down another: Afghanistan

I'm starting to wonder if our President is a pacifist.
 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Gold Member
Sep 4, 2018
3,298
3,802
365
Don't you mean Obama? That's what HE did.
The difference is that Obama ran as if he would do something about the defense industry then just threw up his fucking hands and gave up. Trump just ran on the standard pro US line that everyone buys into, especially the people hyperventalating about traitors and insulting the country. This outcome is a pleasant surprise whereas with Obama it was ultimately dissiullioning proof that the corporate left will take no responsibility and nothing will change
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
20,553
16,449
685
Obama's foreign policy was a complete bait-and-switch. President Trump's is still a work in progress, but so far he's made more progress than Bush and Obama combined, in two years no less.

He's ended two wars: Syria and Korea.
He's winding down another: Afghanistan

I'm starting to wonder if our President is a pacifist.
And he bombed an empty airport as a muscle flex exercise for no lives lost! You may be on to something. :pie_thinking:
 

Teletraan1

Member
May 17, 2012
5,664
1,900
525
Canada
You realize that Obama had 4 different defense secretaries over his tenure as president? Robert M. Gates, Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, Ash Carter. Did you shit your pants when that happened? Did anyone even care? It is pretty common to have turnover in these roles but continue looking like you started following politics in 2016.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
20,553
16,449
685
Weird how Trump the pacifist has significantly expanded the drone strike program and shoveled money at the Pentagon. Must be an oversight.
"Keeps our troops out of harms way, so it saves American lives!"

Wasn't that the response the Left used for 8 years under Obomba when he did it?
 
Last edited:

TheShadowLord

Member
Jan 7, 2018
2,428
1,040
345
Obama's foreign policy was a complete bait-and-switch. President Trump's is still a work in progress, but so far he's made more progress than Bush and Obama combined, in two years no less.

He's ended two wars: Syria and Korea.
He's winding down another: Afghanistan

I'm starting to wonder if our President is a pacifist.
Progress? North Korea still hasn't given up its Nukes, has said it will not, and with reports of it building new missile basses. And for Syria, ISIS hasn't been fully defeated yet and the place still isn't stable for people to return. After all, he put Syria along with Yemen and Libya on his travel ban list and prevented refugees from these worn torn countries from coming to the USA. Touting national security to prevent Islamic terrorist from coming here.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,044
1,664
1,235
Best Coast
Is this really all you understand about this situation?
The vast majority of people's problem with Trump is that he doesn't listen to the advice of those who are experts in their fields.
You listen to your Scientists when you make decisions about science
You listen to Health Policy advisors when you make decisions about health policy.
..and you listen to you Generals and Intelligence communities about ongoing conflicts.

This is a particular problem because...and I don't know if you have noticed this...but he's incredibly fucking stupid. Like...shockingly fucking stupid. You should listen to him talk for like 5 minutes.
When your experts are compromised by conflicts of interest, sometimes they're not giving you the best advice. There's an entire economy built around war, and US presence in foreign countries. The military industrial complex ensures that there's a financial incentive for more war. As the saying goes, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. You are also selling and manufacturing both hammers and nails.


Don't you mean Obama? That's what HE did.
They both did it. It's easy to take individual aspects about an administration and create a hot take out of it, but it's helpful to step back and look at their records overall. Despite the recent news, Trump (like every other modern president before him) is still bombing the shit out of a lot of places.

Progress? North Korea still hasn't given up its Nukes, has said it will not, and with reports of it building new missile basses.
And yet the historically high positive relationship North Korea has with South Korea, and the steps they're taking to improve relations - that's not progress to you?
 

Woo-Fu

incest on the subway
Jan 2, 2007
13,740
747
1,130
And yet the historically high positive relationship North Korea has with South Korea, and the steps they're taking to improve relations - that's not progress to you?
It doesn't matter how good the relationship is, you still have exactly the same situation, North Korea's land forces poised to strike across the DMZ whenever their god-figure decides it is time to do so.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,044
1,664
1,235
Best Coast
It doesn't matter how good the relationship is, you still have exactly the same situation, North Korea's land forces poised to strike across the DMZ whenever their god-figure decides it is time to do so.
Well obviously we're still far from where we want to be, but recent events indicate positive progress.
 

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
64
56
170
It is unfathomable to me that people are trying to spin this.

Mattis quit for the reasons he outlined in the letter which was, while politely worded, positively incendiary. He condemned Trump for abandoning allies and for, against all seeming reason, trusting the Russians and consistently refusing to hold them at arms length. Our POTUS does not seemingly view them as a threat to the United States. That he resigned not days after we're to pull out of Syria says all that you really need to know, especially when examining Trump's past record and dealings (and those dealings of his inner circle) with the Russians.

Trump is either legitimately stupid or inundated with undue foreign influence from a hostile power. There's no 'great game' happening here, no 'next-level' strategy. Even fucking John Bolton remarked that 'Putin looked Trump in the eye and lied to him'.

We all need to take a few steps back from this tribal warfare mentality that is gripping this country. Partisanship is killing us, and there needs to be a moment to seriously take a breath and move away from our comfort zones politically. People middle and right of center should be extremely disconcerted with the president right now, they should have a good while ago honestly. Mattis resigning should be something of along the lines of the canary fucking mutating in the nuclear power plant.

Note: I am not a leftist.
 
Last edited:

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,423
1,146
540
Obama's foreign policy was a complete bait-and-switch. President Trump's is still a work in progress, but so far he's made more progress than Bush and Obama combined, in two years no less.

He's ended two wars: Syria and Korea.
He's winding down another: Afghanistan

I'm starting to wonder if our President is a pacifist.
N Korea expanding missile bases

His own Defense Secretary, with more military experience than Trump can comprehend, resigns over Syria. This is a bad thing.

Trump expanding drone bombings into other countries, vry pacifist wow.

Afghanistan was wound up and wound down by the Obama administration. Trump has changed very little.



So much propaganda, so little time.
 

MDS

Neo Member
Oct 8, 2018
47
82
115
It is unfathomable to me that people are trying to spin this.

Mattis quit for the reasons he outlined in the letter which was, while politely worded, positively incendiary. He condemned Trump for abandoning allies and for, against all seeming reason, trusting the Russians and consistently refusing to hold them at arms length. Our POTUS does not seemingly view them as a threat to the United States. That he resigned not days after we're to pull out of Syria says all that you really need to know, especially when examining Trump's past record and dealings (and those dealings of his inner circle) with the Russians.

Trump is either legitimately stupid or inundated with undue foreign influence from a hostile power. There's no 'great game' happening here, no 'next-level' strategy. Even fucking John Bolton remarked that 'Putin looked Trump in the eye and lied to him'.

We all need to take a few steps back from this tribal warfare mentality that is gripping this country. Partisanship is killing us, and there needs to be a moment to seriously take a breath and move away from our comfort zones politically. People middle and right of center should be extremely disconcerted with the president right now, they should have a good while ago honestly. Mattis resigning should be something of along the lines of the canary fucking mutating in the nuclear power plant.

Note: I am not a leftist.
The US has no real reason to be in Syria. The US is in Syria against the wishes of the public and via a process that end ran elected representatives as much as possible. If we were to accept the currently stated reasons to be in Syria as valid then it would be another country we could never leave because none of those reasons are going to change any time soon, in 10 years Turkey is still going to be hostile to the Kurds and the Kurds will still not be able to deter the Turks,

These kind of games of empire probably mean a great deal to Mattis. He's been involved with them his entire life and I imagine he has a great deal of emotional investment. I can't say I care though, the health of the American empire doesn't matter to me and it shouldn't to the average American either. It's a burden, as much as they pretend you have a stake in it ultimately it's money and lives spent on the wealth and prestige and vanity our leadership
 
Last edited:

Composer

Member
Oct 2, 2015
524
149
250
N Korea expanding missile bases

His own Defense Secretary, with more military experience than Trump can comprehend, resigns over Syria. This is a bad thing.

Trump expanding drone bombings into other countries, vry pacifist wow.

Afghanistan was wound up and wound down by the Obama administration. Trump has changed very little.



So much propaganda, so little time.

Its not worth trying to educate Trumpets. I really don't understand where they get their info, or why they are so gullible.
 

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,423
1,146
540
The US has no real reason to be in Syria. The US is in Syria against the wishes of the public and via a process that end ran elected representatives as much as possible. If we were to accept the currently stated reasons to be in Syria as valid then it would be another country we could never leave because none of those reasons are going to change any time soon, in 10 years Turkey is still going to be hostile to the Kurds and the Kurds will still not be able to deter the Turks,

These kind of games of empire probably mean a great deal to Mattis. He's been involved with them his entire life and I imagine he has a great deal of emotional investment. I can't say I care though, the health of the American empire doesn't matter to me and it shouldn't to the average American either. It's a burden, as much as they pretend you have a stake in it ultimately it's money and lives spent on the wealth and prestige and vanity our leadership
The Kurds were depending upon the US as allies to prevent their wholesale slaughter by Turkey and Assad. In fact Trump pledged to support them a few months ago.

"We do get along great with the Kurds. Don’t forget, that’s their territory,” Trump told a news conference at the United Nations general assembly last week. “We have to help them. I want to help them...They fought with us. They died with us.”
Throwing your hands up and saying "ah well, not our problem" is not a working military strategy to use for allies you pledge support to. Mattis quite obviously, and correctly, considers this a betrayal.

"Mattis believes pulling out of Syria is a betrayal of the Kurds ... and the Syrian Democratic Forces, U.S. allies who U.S. military leaders believe will be slaughtered after the U.S. leaves Syria, as well as refugees who are on the ground there being protected by U.S. forces," Griffin reported.
 
Nov 1, 2017
748
1,084
220
You realize that Obama had 4 different defense secretaries over his tenure as president? Robert M. Gates, Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, Ash Carter. Did you shit your pants when that happened? Did anyone even care? It is pretty common to have turnover in these roles but continue looking like you started following politics in 2016.
Didn't Obama fire Mattis at one point?

Wonder if the same people who are proclaiming the last adult in the government to be fired were saying that back then too..

Oh wait no they weren't they were too busy praising Obama for receiving a Nobel Peace Prize
 

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,423
1,146
540
You realize that Obama had 4 different defense secretaries over his tenure as president? Robert M. Gates, Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, Ash Carter. Did you shit your pants when that happened? Did anyone even care? It is pretty common to have turnover in these roles but continue looking like you started following politics in 2016.
Turnover is expected. The Secretary of Defense shitting on the President's policy on Department of Defense letterhead in a resignation letter is not. That other senators like Graham and McConnel are worrying out loud about the stark division between Mattis and Trump is not. Try to keep up.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,044
1,664
1,235
Best Coast
The Kurds were depending upon the US as allies to prevent their wholesale slaughter by Turkey and Assad. In fact Trump pledged to support them a few months ago.

Throwing your hands up and saying "ah well, not our problem" is not a working military strategy to use for allies you pledge support to. Mattis quite obviously, and correctly, considers this a betrayal.
Our involvement over there causes more problems than it solves. Sometimes the only winning move is not to play.

This also wouldn't be the first time we've left the Kurds out to dry. The US usually operates on self interest, rather than "friendship".
 

i_am_ben

running_here_and_there
Feb 5, 2008
8,520
360
1,025
The Trump administration certainly has a problem with how it treats its allies.

On many of the issues, the USA's goals have been made significantly harder by how Trump treats America's long-term allies and his twitter diplomacy. Take the China Tariffs for instance. He could have better coordinated Chinese tariffs with the EU but instead chose to impose steel tariffs on European countries. The USA wasted a lot of time and goodwill - eventually being forced to exempt a lot of crucial allies.
 

Teletraan1

Member
May 17, 2012
5,664
1,900
525
Canada
Turnover is expected. The Secretary of Defense shitting on the President's policy on Department of Defense letterhead in a resignation letter is not. That other senators like Graham and McConnel are worrying out loud about the stark division between Mattis and Trump is not. Try to keep up.
Says the poster that was denying what Antifa really was for months. Or do you not remember that thread. I sure do. Give me a fucking break.

He was not happy with this policy, neither were a lot of the old guard warhawk meddlers that got the US into places like Afghanistan for 17 years with no goal, no progress, no nothing under the guise of strategic alliances. Nothing in that letter is shitting on policy. It is called a difference of opinion(these things can happen in the real world). He is a wartime consigliere while Trump needs a peace time one. You and others are really reaching here.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
9,761
16,743
690
USA
dunpachi.com
Sure are some war-loving "Democrats" in here who also love to "stand up" for the working class.

I'm seriously shocked at what the Left has become in the past 10 years. You're more corporate-bought and more war-loving than the midwestern Christian conservatives I grew up with and went to school with.
 
D

Deleted member 77995

Unconfirmed Member
Sure are some war-loving "Democrats" in here who also love to "stand up" for the working class.

I'm seriously shocked at what the Left has become in the past 10 years. You're more corporate-bought and more war-loving than the midwestern Christian conservatives I grew up with and went to school with.
How to virtue signal
 
D

Deleted member 77995

Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, I'll "virtue signal" about getting out of wars. Cry about it.

It's amusing that you can't even come up with a retort so you have to label it as "virtue signaling". :messenger_grimmacing_:messenger_ok:
What kind of retort can be levelled at such a strawman? We're pulling out of the ME (which is overall a good thing) but we've been redeploying more troops to the Pacific throughout this year and no signs of that slowing down...
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
9,761
16,743
690
USA
dunpachi.com
What kind of retort can be levelled at such a strawman? We're pulling out of the ME (which is overall a good thing) but we've been redeploying more troops to the Pacific throughout this year and no signs of that slowing down...
What armed conflicts are going on in the Pacific? Otherwise, this is a false equivalency. Redeploying troops into non-combat zones isn't the same thing as leaving troops in an active warzone/rebellion.

Seriously, I know Trump is hated, but the hemming and hawing about pulling out troops reeks of partisanship. Americans are sick of war. My entire childhood and teenage years have been punctuated by wars in foreign countries, and this has only further damaged America's reputation on the world scene.

"We don't need to be the world police" has been the ongoing cry since before I was born.

Trump pulls out troops. A warmongering general retires. The Left wants to make this look like a bad thing on Trump. Hilarious.
 

cubicle47b

Member
Jun 9, 2004
6,691
113
1,275
Didn't Obama fire Mattis at one point?

Wonder if the same people who are proclaiming the last adult in the government to be fired were saying that back then too..
It's pretty simple why people weren't saying that. He wasn't the last adult in the government back then. He is in this clusterfuck of an administration.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 77995

Unconfirmed Member
What armed conflicts are going on in the Pacific? Otherwise, this is a false equivalency. Redeploying troops into non-combat zones isn't the same thing as leaving troops in an active warzone/rebellion.

Seriously, I know Trump is hated, but the hemming and hawing about pulling out troops reeks of partisanship. Americans are sick of war. My entire childhood and teenage years have been punctuated by wars in foreign countries, and this has only further damaged America's reputation on the world scene.

"We don't need to be the world police" has been the ongoing cry since before I was born.

Trump pulls out troops. A warmongering general retires. The Left wants to make this look like a bad thing on Trump. Hilarious.
We're putting more pressure on North Korea and China moving troops and naval assets through the area. It's not active combat but it's definitely world policing. Funnily enough, Trump already tried to pull troops out of South Korea but John Kelly talked him out of it. Yet you didnt mention that and you're also content to chastise the left for criticism of Trump that is bipartisan in nature. That's the insincerity and divisiveness that I find appalling from someone who I consider to be one of the more reasonable and level-headed posters on this board.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
9,761
16,743
690
USA
dunpachi.com
We're putting more pressure on North Korea and China moving troops and naval assets through the area. It's not active combat but it's definitely world policing. Funnily enough, Trump already tried to pull troops out of South Korea but John Kelly talked him out of it. Yet you didnt mention that and you're also content to chastise the left for criticism of Trump that is bipartisan in nature. That's the insincerity and divisiveness that I find appalling from someone who I consider to be one of the more reasonable and level-headed posters on this board.
You're right: it's not merely the Left who are criticizing Trump for this, as Republicans like Lindsay Graham are also heavily criticizing Trump for pulling out of Syria. Trump is also talking about getting out of Afghanistan.

It is the sentiment I disagree with, ultimately, so don't take my finger-pointing at the Left as complacency toward the Right's warmongering. They are also crying about Trump's decision and I oppose them as well.

But I expect Republicans and Conservatives to be warmongers. I may be Conservative but I am still anti-war. What I don't expect is for people who say they are on the Left who then stand up for the military-industrial complex, for stupid wars (that Congress actually voted against but Obama put us into anyway), and for ongoing conflict.

Regarding the issue of N. Korea and moving more assets into Asia: would I rather have the US not build up in Asia, too? Of course. But that doesn't erase or diminish a removal of troops from the middle east and the retirement of a warmongering General.

The USA can't "stop being the world police" while simultaneously being the world police in every conflict. If the USA is going to move away from its current status as "world police", what behavior would you expect them to exhibit? I think pulling out of active conflict zones would be moving us away from being "world police". Do you not believe this is the case?
 

infinitys_7th

Member
Oct 1, 2006
3,898
3,521
1,090
His own Defense Secretary, with more military experience than Trump can comprehend, resigns over Syria. This is a bad thing.
His experience can't be worth much, considering he was just one of many through the revolving door of the past 16 years of massive military failures.
 

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,423
1,146
540
Says the poster that was denying what Antifa really was for months. Or do you not remember that thread. I sure do. Give me a fucking break.

He was not happy with this policy, neither were a lot of the old guard warhawk meddlers that got the US into places like Afghanistan for 17 years with no goal, no progress, no nothing under the guise of strategic alliances. Nothing in that letter is shitting on policy. It is called a difference of opinion(these things can happen in the real world). He is a wartime consigliere while Trump needs a peace time one. You and others are really reaching here.
Denying what antifa was? I always thought they were dumb and violent even if I still view their ideology as more ethical than, say, a Nazi. Not by much, but still more ethical. Sorry if that grinds your gears, not sure what the fuck you're on about.

I love how everyone keeps bringing up the wars we've been in since 9/11 and then proceeds to ignore the fact that those wars have succeeded in keeping the fight out of our country. Just doing nothing would've turned Isis etc into much more powerful entities with a much larger reach and asset pool.
 
Last edited:
Nov 23, 2010
4,328
262
625
I love how everyone keeps bringing up the wars we've been in since 9/11 and then proceeds to ignore the fact that those wars have succeeded in keeping the fight out of our country. Just doing nothing would've turned Isis etc into much more powerful entities with a much larger reach and asset pool.
Everyone is bringing it up because the US has spent around $2 trillion, 1000s of US military/US contractors are dead and the region has been destabilized. It's a joke after nearly 20 years.

Also, how are the wars "keeping the fight out of our country"?

Since the two original Middle East campaigns kicked off, the US has had nearly 2 dozen deadly attacks by radical Islamist extremists. And they could've been worse had it not been for the fact most of these knuckleheads are incompetent.

And don't forget about all the valuable lives ruined/lost that aren't American. No one has a true grasp of how much collateral damage has resulted:

In February 2003, Elliott Abrams, a US official convicted of lying to Congress over the Iran-Contra affair but pardoned by President George HW Bush, spoke to the media about the impending invasion of Iraq, ordered by Bush’s son.

Abrams claimed in his remarks about “humanitarian reconstruction” that six priorities had driven the planning. “The first is to try to minimise the displacement and the damage to the infrastructure and the disruption of services,” he said. “And the military campaign planning has had – has been tailored to try to do that, to try to minimise the impact on civilian populations.”

It didn’t turn out that way. Sixteen years after Bush launched his so-called “war on terror”, millions of people’s lives have been turned upside down, Isis has been allowed to fester and spread, and Iraq is a nation at risk of fracturing apart. Moreover, an untold number of innocent civilians have been killed – by disease, illness, in gruesome tortures performed by local and foreign insurgents, and by the US and UK-led military campaign that Abrams and others vowed would be surgical.
Ultimately, Pres. Trump wouldn't be calling the shots if the folks running the show before him hadn't created a complete and total disaster for someone else to clean up. People can disagree, but Pres. Trump is in charge because people were making bad decisions as opposed to good decisions before he got in there. He ran a successful political campaign to MAGA because the US isn't heading in the right direction and somebody needs to shake things up.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,044
1,664
1,235
Best Coast
I love how everyone keeps bringing up the wars we've been in since 9/11 and then proceeds to ignore the fact that those wars have succeeded in keeping the fight out of our country.
Seriously? The flypaper strategy? Paul Wolfowitz is that you? That's a shitty neocon theory-crafting talking point that has little evidence that it actually works.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/blog/2005/jun/23/whathappenedt1

One of the more Machiavellian justifications for invading Iraq was the flypaper theory. Invading and occupying Iraq might turn the country into a magnet for anti-US terrorists, the argument went, but it was better to slug it out in a distant and foreign land instead of closer to home.


The so-called flypaper strategy had a certain logic and superficial appeal even if it dripped cynicism. Most Iraqis might be glad to see the back of Saddam Hussein, but they are probably none too thrilled that their country has turned into a vicious battleground between US forces and the jihadists, especially as most of the casualties are Iraqis.


Now a CIA report reveals that US intelligence officials are beginning to have doubts about the flypaper idea.


According to a report in the New York Times, a new classified assessment says Iraq may prove to be an even more effective training ground for extremists than Afghanistan was for al-Qaida, because it is serving as a real-world laboratory for urban combat.


Even more worrying, intelligence officials told the Times that Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other unnamed countries - presumably the US and the UK - would soon have to contend with militants leaving Iraq equipped with considerable experience and training.


In an age of globalisation, the flypaper theory seemed to smack of wishful thinking. Even if the US eventually prevails in Iraq, many of those who have acquired their terrorist skills in the "Iraqi lab" will have made their getaway. If so, one of the justifications for going into Iraq - that it would advance the "war on terror" - will have turned out to be an illusion.
Just doing nothing would've turned Isis etc into much more powerful entities with a much larger reach and asset pool.
If we had "just done nothing", maybe ISIS and Al Qaeda wouldn't exist in the first place.

ISIS exists because it was part of the resistance to US occupation of Iraq. They wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the USA's warmongering.
 

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,423
1,146
540
Seriously? The flypaper strategy? Paul Wolfowitz is that you? That's a shitty neocon theory-crafting talking point that has little evidence that it actually works.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/blog/2005/jun/23/whathappenedt1




If we had "just done nothing", maybe ISIS and Al Qaeda wouldn't exist in the first place.

ISIS exists because it was part of the resistance to US occupation of Iraq. They wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the USA's warmongering.

The vast majority of casualties of Isis and Al Queda attacks are fellow Islamic people. If you think American intervention is to blame for inter-religious conflicts you don't know much about the middle East.

Everyone is bringing it up because the US has spent around $2 trillion, 1000s of US military/US contractors are dead and the region has been destabilized. It's a joke after nearly 20 years.

Also, how are the wars "keeping the fight out of our country"?

Since the two original Middle East campaigns kicked off, the US has had nearly 2 dozen deadly attacks by radical Islamist extremists. And they could've been worse had it not been for the fact most of these knuckleheads are incompetent.

And don't forget about all the valuable lives ruined/lost that aren't American. No one has a true grasp of how much collateral damage has resulted:



Ultimately, Pres. Trump wouldn't be calling the shots if the folks running the show before him hadn't created a complete and total disaster for someone else to clean up. People can disagree, but Pres. Trump is in charge because people were making bad decisions as opposed to good decisions before he got in there. He ran a successful political campaign to MAGA because the US isn't heading in the right direction and somebody needs to shake things up.
If you think Trump was elected due to his foreign policy positions I have no idea what universe you're living in.
 
Last edited:

TheShadowLord

Member
Jan 7, 2018
2,428
1,040
345
What armed conflicts are going on in the Pacific? Otherwise, this is a false equivalency. Redeploying troops into non-combat zones isn't the same thing as leaving troops in an active warzone/rebellion.

Seriously, I know Trump is hated, but the hemming and hawing about pulling out troops reeks of partisanship. Americans are sick of war. My entire childhood and teenage years have been punctuated by wars in foreign countries, and this has only further damaged America's reputation on the world scene.

"We don't need to be the world police" has been the ongoing cry since before I was born.

Trump pulls out troops. A warmongering general retires. The Left wants to make this look like a bad thing on Trump. Hilarious.
Well it wasn't right overthrowing Gaddafi or Saddam or going as far to get rid of Assad. But leaving a country like Iraq or Libya in ruins isn't good either because their government can't handle rebuilding their infrastructure. How else ISIS took control of Mosul? Or how else The Tablian, over the years were able to gain more territory in Afghanistan for the same reasons. I don't see why it wouldn't be wrong for the US to foot the bill.
 
Nov 23, 2010
4,328
262
625
If you think Trump was elected due to his foreign policy positions I have no idea what universe you're living in.
Why would you say that? I think that had a lot to do with it. Pres. Trump was elected in part because he explicitly rejected how neoconservatives and other groups see the world. Doesn't seem too controversial.


In any event, given all the spin I'm hearing from some Americans about the benefits of what's going on such as stopping humans rights violations and keeping the fight out of their country....maybe you're right and I'm living in the twilight zone.

At the end of the day, after years of failure what are the limits:
  • How many people have to die in these wars?
  • How long will these conflicts go on?
  • How much money are you willing to spend on this vs. other things?
  • How many people have to emigrate because of the spillover effects of your actions and support?
I don't know...maybe there's a fantasy world where the US was doing a fantastic job and on the right track in the Middle East.

However, I think if you take a step back and look around, then you'd see millions of people at home and abroad have had their lives turned upside down or are dead because of an awful worldview about the international role the US ought to have.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,044
1,664
1,235
Best Coast
The vast majority of casualties of Isis and Al Queda attacks are fellow Islamic people. If you think American intervention is to blame for inter-religious conflicts you don't know much about the middle East.
Whom they target is irrelevant to my point. ISIS exists because of the Iraq war. Al Qaeda exists because of our proxy war shenanigans against the Soviet Union. If you don't think American intervention is to blame for the mess we're in now, you don't know much about history. Don't go handwaving away decades of imperialist colonialism just because the bad guys kill their own countrymen too.
 

MisterFalcon

Member
Mar 12, 2013
2,914
126
410
Whom they target is irrelevant to my point. ISIS exists because of the Iraq war. Al Qaeda exists because of our proxy war shenanigans against the Soviet Union. If you don't think American intervention is to blame for the mess we're in now, you don't know much about history. Don't go handwaving away decades of imperialist colonialism just because the bad guys kill their own countrymen too.
The correct root cause for the existence of Al Qaeda would be the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, not the US aid that went there, mostly through Pakistani controlled channels.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,044
1,664
1,235
Best Coast
The correct root cause for the existence of Al Qaeda would be the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, not the US aid that went there, mostly through Pakistani controlled channels.
You think that they would have become as capable an organization even without the help of US resources? Blaming it all on the Soviets isn't telling the whole story.
 

MisterFalcon

Member
Mar 12, 2013
2,914
126
410
You think that they would have become as capable an organization even without the help of US resources? Blaming it all on the Soviets isn't telling the whole story.
There is nothing in 9/11 or any other major terror attack that uses an exclusively American made weapon or technology. Remove the US aid to the Afghani rebels and you still have an Al Qaeda, maybe a far more powerful one as we're going into what-if speculation.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,044
1,664
1,235
Best Coast
There is nothing in 9/11 or any other major terror attack that uses an exclusively American made weapon or technology. Remove the US aid to the Afghani rebels and you still have an Al Qaeda, maybe a far more powerful one as we're going into what-if speculation.
Key word "exclusively". The USA is still a factor. And it's not only material weapons and tech that are in play here.