Syria: they're using chemical weapons...

[BigRob]

You still failed to explain what YOU think are American interests that require young Americans to kill and die for. Unless of course, you agree with the positions held by the current corrupt administration that finds American interests everywhere in the world.

If you want me to type a sentence or two and somehow capture exactly what our interests are, its not going to happen. The world is a complicated place. The best place to start is the National Security Strategy.

Regarding my comment about other people's blood...it was in response to your post of:
What I will do is protect American interests. That is minding my business.
As such, you did say YOU would do the protecting, but I know you did not mean yourself....you much prefer other Americans do your killing and dying for nothing.

Spare me the sanctimonious bullshit. I've served this country. I guess in your world the only people eligible to have an opinion on a war are the soldiers currently fighting in?

To think we have an interest in the Syrian civil war is foolish and fails to recognize the multiple historic failures of the NeoCon/Progressive interventionist policies America has followed for many decades.

The only time Americans must resort to war must be when attacked or attack is imminent. Simple and wise.

Your problem is you seem to think it is either total war or not. That is simply not reality. We can be involved protecting our interests without the military being involved at all.

 

[Gipper]

If you want me to type a sentence or two and somehow capture exactly what our interests are, its not going to happen. The world is a complicated place. The best place to start is the National Security Strategy.



Spare me the sanctimonious bullshit. I've served this country. I guess in your world the only people eligible to have an opinion on a war are the soldiers currently fighting in?



Your problem is you seem to think it is either total war or not. That is simply not reality. We can be involved protecting our interests without the military being involved at all.

Again...you have yet to define the mythical American interests that young Americans must kill and die for in foreign lands. I have clearly defined my position.

I have never been a soldier, sailor, or marine, but I do not want young Americans dying and killing to protect the interests of the global elite, which is exactly what has been going on for decades with horrendous results.

I have never stated anything about total war. I want no foreign interventions of any sort.

 

[dogtowner]

Again...you have yet to define the mythical American interests that young Americans must kill and die for in foreign lands. I have clearly defined my position.

I have never been a soldier, sailor, or marine, but I do not want young Americans dying and killing to protect the interests of the global elite, which is exactly what has been going on for decades with horrendous results.

I have never stated anything about total war. I want no foreign interventions of any sort.

we get that you want to.mind your own business. trouble is the rest of the world will not stop judt because you want it to.

Now perhaps there is a middle ground where the bar is raised some on what demands action than is being used today but your stance of never is equally unsupportable as saxon's balls to the wall in every direction.

i am glad you dropped the pretense of only non intervention for the true usolationalusm you really want.

 

[Gipper]

we get that you want to.mind your own business. trouble is the rest of the world will not stop judt because you want it to.

Now perhaps there is a middle ground where the bar is raised some on what demands action than is being used today but your stance of never is equally unsupportable as saxon's balls to the wall in every direction.

i am glad you dropped the pretense of only non intervention for the true usolationalusm you really want.

I am not an isolationist. But if you think an isolationist is someone who does not intervene in other nation's political affairs and disputes, I am guilty as charged.

We have military personnel in over 100 nations. To say nothing of CIA operatives, who likely exist in all nations. We are involved in who knows how many wars...since our government is now so corrupt and deceptive, it is difficult for us to know what they are up to. Is this what you believe is an effective foreign policy?

It is too bad you and so many Americans are interventionists. It only empowers and enriches the power elite leading to more war, resulting in more death and destruction, with terribly negative consequences....such as bankrupting the nation.

 

[dogtowner]

I am not an isolationist. But if you think an isolationist is someone who does not intervene in other nation's political affairs and disputes, I am guilty as charged.

We have military personnel in over 100 nations. To say nothing of CIA operatives, who likely exist in all nations. We are involved in who knows how many wars...since our government is now so corrupt and deceptive, it is difficult for us to know what they are up to. Is this what you believe is an effective foreign policy?

It is too bad you and so many Americans are interventionists. It only empowers and enriches the power elite leading to more war, resulting in more death and destruction, with terribly negative consequences....such as bankrupting the nation.

your admission came in the form of "never".being oermissable occasions.

upset that the CIA is gathering intel ? would you have.us even.less informed of bad goings on ?

i can agree thst the need for troops in Germany is long since necessary so as i.said a better.middle ground is attainable. but abandoning any visibility to whats going on out. in the wide.world is short sighted.

 

[Gipper]

your admission came in the form of "never".being oermissable occasions.

upset that the CIA is gathering intel ? would you have.us even.less informed of bad goings on ?

i can agree thst the need for troops in Germany is long since necessary so as i.said a better.middle ground is attainable. but abandoning any visibility to whats going on out. in the wide.world is short sighted.

I at no time have indicated that America should abandon recognizing and understanding what is going on in the world. My position is very clear and concise. It is we do not intervene, overtly or covertly, in other nation's affairs. It is simple. It does not mean we ignore what is occurring around the world.

 

[dogtowner]

I at no time have indicated that America should abandon recognizing and understanding what is going on in the world. My position is very clear and concise. It is we do not intervene, overtly or covertly, in other nation's affairs. It is simple. It does not mean we ignore what is occurring around the world.

you cite intel (CIA) as being bad.. if Im taking that wrong then fine but you seemed.clear and concise to.me.

it coukd be that your ststed.goals are.incompatible.

 

[Gipper]

you cite intel (CIA) as being bad.. if Im taking that wrong then fine but you seemed.clear and concise to.me.

it coukd be that your ststed.goals are.incompatible.

I don't think you are understanding my position. When I say we recognize and understand what is going on in the world, it does not require the CIA spying on foreign nations. You seem to think we need the CIA's spying to know whats up. I do not.

When a nation follows a policy of non-intervention, that nation does not need a spy agency.

It is the height of hypocrisy that America spies on all nations, but when a nation does it to us, we get all pissy. China, Russia, and other nations are spying on us, while we spy on them.

 

[dogtowner]

I don't think you are understanding my position. When I say we recognize and understand what is going on in the world, it does not require the CIA spying on foreign nations. You seem to think we need the CIA's spying to know whats up. I do not.

When a nation follows a policy of non-intervention, that nation does not need a spy agency.

It is the height of hypocrisy that America spies on all nations, but when a nation does it to us, we get all pissy. China, Russia, and other nations are spying on us, while we spy on them.

the point of intel is to insure thst you know when the other party is lying. and they all lie friend or foe. the wikileaks highlighted when we lie.
you absolutly require the CIA doing their thing. you seem unaware that those others act all pissy too when they.catch one of ours. its all part of the game.

 

[Aus22]

I agree with Gipper on this. We should be inform but will do not need to intervene in evey conflict. This is worst if it involves spying even on your own people.

 

[Gipper]

the point of intel is to insure thst you know when the other party is lying. and they all lie friend or foe. the wikileaks highlighted when we lie.
you absolutly require the CIA doing their thing. you seem unaware that those others act all pissy too when they.catch one of ours. its all part of the game.

I am not following you.

I do not think we need the CIA at all.

We do not need to spy on any nation and we should not let any nation spy on us.

 

[Gipper]

I agree with Gipper on this. We should be inform but will do not need to intervene in evey conflict. This is worst if it involves spying even on your own people.

Yeah the American government is not only spying on all nations of the world, it is spying on it's own citizens. Just another example of a government out of control.

 

[dogtowner]

I am not following you.

I do not think we need the CIA at all.

We do not need to spy on any nation and we should not let any nation spy on us.

regarding our friends Reagan wisely said trust but verify. not our friends, trudt them only as far as you can throw them.

you can only KNOW what countries are up to if you find out yourself.

everyone would like to stop being spied upon. success rates vary widely.

 

[BigRob]

I at no time have indicated that America should abandon recognizing and understanding what is going on in the world. My position is very clear and concise. It is we do not intervene, overtly or covertly, in other nation's affairs. It is simple. It does not mean we ignore what is occurring around the world.

I don't get how this works in practice. China for example might view it as their "affair" to control shipping through the Panama Canal. Are we just supposed to just accept this?

 

[dogtowner]

I don't get how this works in practice. China for example might view it as their "affair" to control shipping through the Panama Canal. Are we just supposed to just accept this?

I dont even get how its supposed to work in theory.

I understand Gip has developed a peacenik worldview and while I respect that he is certainly free to do so, I wont let it slide when he tries to support it as policy that is good for the country.