R3VLimited Forums

Go Back   R3VLimited Forums > General Forums > Off Topic Lounge > Politics and Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-15-2019, 10:03 AM   #2911
parkerbink
R3V OG
 
parkerbink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: I fart in your general direction.
Posts: 9,749
Send a message via AIM to parkerbink Send a message via MSN to parkerbink Send a message via Yahoo to parkerbink
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wschnitz View Post
Starting to look like the Admin will push for War in Iran.

Just what we need, more billions spent on a war with no motive beyond antagonizing the middle east for war profiteers.
The British say they see no increase in Iran's build up.

I'm afraid it's a distraction.

Also on the lies, yes all pols lie, no one has lied at the level, frequency and broad range of topics as Trump.

If Trump told me my name, I'd check my license.
__________________

parkerbink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2019, 05:23 PM   #2912
phillipj
Wrencher
 
phillipj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago & LA
Posts: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wschnitz View Post
Starting to look like the Admin will push for War in Iran.

Just what we need, more billions spent on a war with no motive beyond antagonizing the middle east for war profiteers.
"Starting?" Ha. This has been the plan all along! This is the worst.

I think a lot of us were like, well, Trump campaigned as an isolationist, he would at least be less Imperialist than Clinton. It's all total BS.

Before he was even elected they were having meetings with the Saudis and the Israelis and the UAE and Erik Prince to gin up a war in Iran.

How on Earth does someone put a complete idiot like John Bolton in power? Trump does. This is a dangerous, score settling, chicken hawk person that should not be anywhere near leading us into war with Iran.

The Trump Admin. is Bush foreign policy all over again and it's a complete mess.
__________________
1990 BMW 325iC Triple Black Hard Top, Self-Wrenched, Original Owner Family
phillipj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2019, 05:22 AM   #2913
z31maniac
I waste 90% of my day here and all I got was this stupid title
 
z31maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 17,330
Send a message via AIM to z31maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillipj View Post

The Trump Admin. is the Military-Industrial Complex foreign policy all over again and it's a complete mess.
Fixed that for you.

Or did you forget all the Libya, Yemen, and the other countries Obama bombed as well?
__________________
Need parts now? Need them cheap? steve@blunttech.com
Chief Sales Officer, Midwest Division—Blunt Tech Industries

www.gutenparts.com
One stop shopping for NEW, USED and EURO PARTS!

z31maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2019, 05:11 PM   #2914
Melon
Mod Crazy
 
Melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 769
Iran isn't Iraq, they're a much stronger country.
Also, the Russians wouldn't miss an opportunity to embarrass us. I would fully expect T-14 tanks, S-400 Sam and troops should we try the same shit we did in other parts of the Middle East.
__________________
I do things.
Melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2019, 08:48 PM   #2915
phillipj
Wrencher
 
phillipj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago & LA
Posts: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by z31maniac View Post
Fixed that for you.

Or did you forget all the Libya, Yemen, and the other countries Obama bombed as well?
Gosh, Thanks.
All these regime-change escapades are huge mistakes whether under Obama or under Trump or under Bush or Clinton or Reagan or whatever neo-con / neo-liberal Imperialist President & Administration we have next... But we can speak in generalities and the past, or we can speak in specifics here about Iran and right now.

Most likely the best answer is not to waste time conversing here at all.
__________________
1990 BMW 325iC Triple Black Hard Top, Self-Wrenched, Original Owner Family

Last edited by phillipj; 05-18-2019 at 03:13 AM.
phillipj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2019, 04:39 AM   #2916
Melon
Mod Crazy
 
Melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 769
I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't see a general reshaping of the Middle East through armed conflict in the next 20 years.

I just wish we would stay out of it. It's not like WWII where there was a clear evil in Nazi Germany that needed to be vanquished, both the Saudis and Iranians have deplorable human rights volations, extremist religious laws, and are both very interested in staying regressive. It's not really a win-win for anyone.

We could change our policy to be less dependant on Saudi oil, and restructure our energy systems, but that's a 50-year solution, but I digress.
__________________
I do things.
Melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2019, 09:09 AM   #2917
mbonder
R3VLimited
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morristown, NJ
Posts: 2,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melon View Post
I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't see a general reshaping of the Middle East through armed conflict in the next 20 years.

I just wish we would stay out of it. It's not like WWII where there was a clear evil in Nazi Germany that needed to be vanquished, both the Saudis and Iranians have deplorable human rights volations, extremist religious laws, and are both very interested in staying regressive. It's not really a win-win for anyone.

We could change our policy to be less dependant on Saudi oil, and restructure our energy systems, but that's a 50-year solution, but I digress.
There are two schools of thought here as far as intervention/non-intervention

If you perceive the use of chemical weapons and persecutions that some of these countries commit upon their own people as clear evil, than you would support intervention in the name of protecting those people.

There is a doctrine within the UN known as the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine, which basically allows countries to defy the sovereignty of other nations in the name of protecting the people within those borders. The origination of this doctrine was the idea that individual people would never be able to stand up to their own governments and military so there had to be a directive in the UN to protect the individual.

If you don't believe that the protection of the individual is important outside of the US, than you certainly don't believe in intervention. There is a practicality here that asks, what is the alternative? The line can certainly be blurred between Right to Protect and Regime change and there is a large portion of foreign policy study devoted to issues of sovereignty as applied to Right to Protect.

I have wavered between the between addressing humanitarian concerns and asking if it is even possible to set up any sort of stable society in these areas, so personally, I don't know that I have a solid stance on the issue. In recent times, during the Obama years it appeared as though the Green Revolution would bring regime change within several Middle Eastern countries and so I don't fault the Obama administration for attempting to aid in these movements as they began from within and the US was only involved after they gained momentum rather than being the catalyst for it. The current Syrian Crisis doesn't really fit that mold and I therefore don't really support US involvement there outside of trying to resolve the differences between the Kurds and Turkey as the Kurds have been significant allies of the US and deserve our aid.
mbonder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2019, 11:30 AM   #2918
z31maniac
I waste 90% of my day here and all I got was this stupid title
 
z31maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 17,330
Send a message via AIM to z31maniac
I think we should just stay the f--- out. When has any of our intervention in the ME ever been positive?
__________________
Need parts now? Need them cheap? steve@blunttech.com
Chief Sales Officer, Midwest Division—Blunt Tech Industries

www.gutenparts.com
One stop shopping for NEW, USED and EURO PARTS!

z31maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2019, 05:02 PM   #2919
Schnitzer318is
R3VLimited
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: TX
Posts: 2,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by z31maniac View Post
I think we should just stay the f--- out. When has any of our intervention in the ME ever been positive?
I tend to agree. The middle east is a centuries old religion and war torn area where Western intervention is only going to stoke fires. The humanitarian issue sucks of course. Proverbial damned if you do, damned if you don't.
__________________
"A good memory for quotes combined with a poor memory for attribution can lead to a false sense of originality."
-----------------------------------------
91 318is Turbo Sold
87 325 Daily driver Sold
06 4.8is X5
06 Mtec X3
05 4.4i X5 Sold
92 325ic Sold & Re-purchased
90 325i Sold
97 328is Sold
01 323ci Sold
92 325i Sold
83 528e Totaled
98 328i Sold
93 325i Sold
Schnitzer318is is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2019, 05:18 AM   #2920
mbonder
R3VLimited
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morristown, NJ
Posts: 2,173
Gulf War I is an example of the US, along with a UN coalition intervening in the Middle East and doing it successfully.

The main difference between the Gulf War I and the more recent conflicts in the Middle East is that the US and Coalition forces had a defined objective, push Iraq out of Kuwait. When they accomplished that goal the war ended.

People questioned Bush I for leaving Saddam in power, but this was actually a smart move because it retained the balance of power within the Middle East, and it proved that the US would not allow one sovereign nation to violate another sovereign nation's territory.

Saddam was very much weakened by Gulf War I, a leader who remained powerful within his own country, but was largely neutered outside of it.

Unfortunately, Bush II didn't have his father's capacity for seeing the larger picture.

You can also make the case that the US's intervention in the form of arms sales to Israel and the subsequent deal brokering creating the Camp David Accords was positive intervention in the Egypt-Israel War.

There are examples, most people are so tainted by the recent failures to be able to look further back than 2003.
mbonder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2019, 06:40 AM   #2921
z31maniac
I waste 90% of my day here and all I got was this stupid title
 
z31maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 17,330
Send a message via AIM to z31maniac
Gulf War I is definitely different than the last few decades of "regime change." As you said, they invaded another country, and the world said, "Nah son."

Very different than dropping bombs on say, Libya for example. Which of course was precipitated by Sarkozy. Because who was the largest importer of Libyan oil?
__________________
Need parts now? Need them cheap? steve@blunttech.com
Chief Sales Officer, Midwest Division—Blunt Tech Industries

www.gutenparts.com
One stop shopping for NEW, USED and EURO PARTS!

z31maniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2019, 05:51 PM   #2922
gwb72tii
No R3VLimiter
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: in the great PNW
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by z31maniac View Post
I think we should just stay the f--- out. When has any of our intervention in the ME ever been positive?
__________________
“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston Churchill
gwb72tii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2019, 11:22 AM   #2923
kronus
R3V OG
 
kronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: fan franfisco
Posts: 12,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by mueller
I will close by reiterating the centeral allegation of our indictment: That there were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere with our election. And that allegation deserves the attention of every American
__________________
cars beep boop
kronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2019, 11:23 AM   #2924
kronus
R3V OG
 
kronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: fan franfisco
Posts: 12,676
full transcript:

Quote:

Thank you for being here. Two years ago, the Acting Attorney General asked me to serve as Special Counsel, and he created the Special Counsel’s Office. The appointment order directed the office to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. This included investigating any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign. Now I have not spoken publicly during our investigation. I’m speaking out today because our investigation is complete. The Attorney General has made the report on our investigation largely public. We are formally closing the Special Counsel’s office, and as well I’m resigning from the Department of Justice to return to private life. I’ll make a few remarks about the results of our work. But beyond these few remarks it is important that the office’s written work speak for itself.

Let me begin where the appointment order begins: and that is interference with the 2016 presidential election. As alleged by the grand jury in an indictment, Russian intelligence officers who were part of the Russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system. The indictment alleges that they used sophisticated cyber techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the Clinton campaign. They stole private information and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization Wikileaks. The releases were designed and times to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate.

And at the same time as the grand jury alleged in a separate indictment, a private Russian entity engaged in a social media operation where Russian citizens posed as Americans in order to influence an election. These indictments contain allegations, and we are not commenting on the guilt or innocence of any specific defendant. Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

The indictments allege, and the other activities in our report describe, efforts to interfere in our political system. They needed to be investigated and understand. And that is among the reasons why the Department of Justice established our office. That is also a reason we investigated efforts to obstruct the investigation. The matters we investigated were of paramount importance and it was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned. When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrong doers accountable.

Let me say a word about the report. The report has two parts, addressing the two main issues we were asked to investigate. The first volume details numerous efforts emanating from Russia to influence the election. This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign’s response to this activity, as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.

And in a second volume, the report describes the results and analysis of our obstruction of justice investigation involving the president.

The order appointing the Special Counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. And we conducted that investigation and we kept the Office of the Acting Attorney General apprised of the progress of our work.

And as set forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.

We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. The introduction to the volume two of our report explains that decision. It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that too is prohibited. The special counsel’s office is part of the Department of Justice and by regulation it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider.

The Department’s written opinion explaining the policy makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report, and I will describe two of them for you. First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now. And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting President of wrong doing. And beyond Department policy we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.

So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated and from them we concluded that we would not reach a determination, one way or the other, about whether the President committed a crime. That is the office’s — that is the office’s final position, and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the President.

We conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the Attorney General, as required by Department regulations. The attorney general then concluded that it was appropriate to provide our report to Congress and to the American people. At one point in time I requested that certain portions of the report be released. The Attorney General preferred to make that — preferred to make the entire report public all at once, and we appreciate that the Attorney General made the report largely public. And I certainly do not question the Attorney General’s good faith in that decision.

Now I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak to you in this manner. I am making that decision myself. No one has told me whether I can or should testify or speak further about this matter. There has been discussion about an appearance before Congress. Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. It contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made. We chose those words carefully and the work speaks for itself. And the report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before congress.

In addition, access to our underlying work product is being decided in a process that does not involve our office. So beyond what I have said here today, and what is contained in our written work, I do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation or to comment on the actions of the Justice Department or Congress. And it’s for that reason I will not be taking questions today as well.

Now before I step away, I want to thank the attorneys, the FBI agents, and analysts, the professional staff who helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner. These individuals who spent nearly two years with the Special Counsel’s Office were of the highest integrity.

And I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments — that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interference in our election. That allegation deserves the attention of every American.

Thank you. Thank you for being here today.
read it, you shits
__________________
cars beep boop
kronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2019, 11:43 AM   #2925
Massive Lee
R3V OG
 
Massive Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Montreal
Posts: 6,636
@Melon. The US is not dependent on Saudi oil. The US is now self-sufficient with a little extra from Canada's Alberta tar sands. But the US needs Saudis for two things. First, that they keep selling oil using US currency, which help keep the US currency strong. The US also pampers Saudis as they are great weapons purchasers. For these reasons, the US is willing to start a war with Iran and avoid any sanctions against Saudis for the Yemen genocide, for killing Kagoshi, and it's weak human rights history. Not to mention Trump's attraction for tyrans.
__________________
Brake harder. Go faster. No shit.

massivebrakes.com

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Massiv...78417442267056





Massive Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2004 - 2020 R3VLimited LLC