• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

US to attack Syria in "unbelievably small, limited strike" if they don't give up chemical weapons

Boss Hog

TRIBE Member
As for the alleged economic/geopolitical benefits from engaging in Syria, I see little examination in the circles propogating these theories to all the potential deleterious downstream consequences from invading Syria - its all about how the West will get a pipleine, or something...

They had the same rhetoric about Iraq - but there was little recognition that the American misadventure there was one of the most stupendous failures of American foreign policy EVER, draining blood and treasure in a futile war that blahblahblah

Iraq had oil.
 
Alex D. from TRIBE on Utility Room

The Watcher

TRIBE Member
The videos I post have the information I'd like to convey.

Besides, do you need my opinion or information?

I've been saying we're going to war with Syria for a couple of years... I've known of this for a long time. Apparently I had a tinfoil hat on at the time says the dynamic duo... but time has proven me right.
 

kuba

TRIBE Member
The videos I post have the information I'd like to convey.

Besides, do you need my opinion or information?

I've been saying we're going to war with Syria for a couple of years... I've known of this for a long time. Apparently I had a tinfoil hat on at the time says the dynamic duo... but time has proven me right.

It isn't a stretch to say America would go to war with _______ (insert middle east country of your choice) for a couple of years. Why? Because it's well known that after the last two failed attempts they will keep trying. It isn't a stretch either because of the vast toll of civilian lives this civil war has cost Syrians, and for "the world" to look to the "world cop" and see what its reaction will be. Further Russia and China's support of Syria has been a roadblock on the path to war, I believe it would've happened long ago if they weren't in the way.

I want your opinion more than the information, because you may or may not agree with some of the information you post.
 

skin deep

TRIBE Member
It isn't a stretch to say America would go to war with _______ (insert middle east country of your choice) for a couple of years. Why? Because it's well known that after the last two failed attempts they will keep trying. It isn't a stretch either because of the vast toll of civilian lives this civil war has cost Syrians, and for "the world" to look to the "world cop" and see what its reaction will be. Further Russia and China's support of Syria has been a roadblock on the path to war, I believe it would've happened long ago if they weren't in the way.

I want your opinion more than the information, because you may or may not agree with some of the information you post.

Wrong, The Watcher is the only person on the planet suspected that there would be war with Syria, nobody else. Not only was he the only person that knew, but he was pigeon holed as a "tinfoil hat" wearer and had to deal with the stigma of being the only person who really knows what's going on in the world.
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

The Watcher

TRIBE Member
In my opinion this is a distraction away from the economy, and a stab at china and russia which is the end goal (after Iran)... if they do nothing the BRICS will have their new monetary system online and the american dollar loses reserve status and the west implodes.

If they go to war, wartime spending starts, conscription(already being legislated in the US & UK) and buildup and all of a sudden, the economy crashing doesn't matter and budgets blow wide open because they'll be able to legislate whatever spending they want. (they are nearing the budget ceiling again right now, this is desperation)

The military industrial complex has nothing to lose, they are instigating this on both sides. If they go to War, I'm sure Obama will stay in office magically.

America has gone rogue and this is all just more British imperialism with the goal of total control and new world order.

The thing is, people are seeing through it all and they are losing control.
 

kyfe

TRIBE Member
The reality is we are all guessing what is going to happen, I've always thought of war as something that defies logic, the motivations are never what you are spoon fed. the spoon feeding is done to rally Americans behind issues the government knows they will support and rarely if at all is it ever even close to the real agenda. Terrorists! Communists! Druglords!

I highly doubt anyone on this board is in any position of authority or has access to information that could confirm or debunk anything said in this thread without it being speculation. That being said why can't we spitball the issue without mocking each other?
 

glych t.anomaly

TRIBE Member
Message board hostility is rampant and alive, veiled in passive aggressive comments, jibes and then leads to not so subtle all out bickering.

its hard for the jaded partiers turned generic board posters/parents/professionals to not release their built up angst and party energy ;)
 

skin deep

TRIBE Member
Any guesses as to what label the US (and media) will put on the intervention in order to avoid actually calling it a "war"?
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

Chris

Well-Known TRIBEr
Should be interesting who joins any sort of group of nations regarding military action. I don't think air-strikes alone will move the civil war in one direction or another. More as a punishment, maybe show of strength to Iran as well. Still, we have over 100,000 dead, and yet the world watches. Then again, let’s look at Rwanda, and other examples where the whole lets go in, humanitarian reasons didn’t seem to push any nation to go in and stop the bloodshed.

I also don’t think the world can have it both ways, you either need a world cop, or you don’t.
 

Chris

Well-Known TRIBEr
"For evil to flourish, all it needs is for good men to do nothing." Yet, doing something here, like air-stikes seems like creep, with eventual boots on the ground, and wade deep into their civil war. I have a feeling the doing nothing approach says a lot about what we are willing to tolerate, that is if indeed chemical weapons were used. Doing something I think will also be equally damaging.

I know, all over the place here.
 

Musical Rush

TRIBE Member
great, now we'll get higher gas prices at the pumps, and just before the long weekend, couldn't they have waited until the long weekend was over?...thank you syria
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

Lojack

TRIBE Member
Easy, a humanitarian effort to protect the innocent from the evil of chemical weapons. Honest.

Still very dumb though. Left or right, the leaders of the US, Britain and France always seem to find an excuse to attack, since the 1950's anyway.

This time it will be different! Really! /sarcasm.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
just wanted to clarify this comment,

of course there is upside, take a look at all the development contracts the hiring of private mercenaries to get around laws, the introduction of western businesses to the region and the deployment of the military. from a monetary perspective there is certainly upside, Rome(the US economy) can burn to the ground, regardless someone will make a profit. When one percent of your population controls ~80% or more of your wealth then who really matters? the other 99% can rot, we've already seen that story start to unfold with LIBOR, recession (almost depression), mortgage scandals, banking scandals etc.

Easy, a humanitarian effort to protect the innocent from the evil of chemical weapons. Honest.

Still very dumb though. Left or right, the leaders of the US, Britain and France always seem to find an excuse to attack, since the 1950's anyway.

This time it will be different! Really! /sarcasm.

This.

So while there are always geopolitical goals at stake - the MIC can't have a war unless WE let them.

And the thing that lets them, most of the time, is actually an honestly held conception of doing justice. Now this may all be rooted in myths of national pride, historical misreading, pride and a certain feeling underneath that you're a "good person" for wanting to stop evil - but in my books? These attitudes are the much greater enabler of war than an MIC ever could be on it's own.

And I think in all the talk of oil in Iraq and potential pipelines in Afghanistan, none of which really panned out the way these critics were alleging they would, we miss the fact that the large majority of people in power who enable these actions are doing so from this misguided mishmash of national myths and the psychological need to see oneself as noble and moral. These attitudes are honestly held in the highest political circles (it helps grease the way up) and they're backed by significant majorities of the population that share these assumptions/myths..

This goes to the Hannah Arendt, banality of evil type stuff - evil things happen from the best intentions all the time....
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
"For evil to flourish, all it needs is for good men to do nothing." Yet, doing something here, like air-stikes seems like creep, with eventual boots on the ground, and wade deep into their civil war. I have a feeling the doing nothing approach says a lot about what we are willing to tolerate, that is if indeed chemical weapons were used. Doing something I think will also be equally damaging.

I know, all over the place here.

These are not easy issues to navigate, certainly. I guess I am just chastened by recent history - I'd love us to have the power and capability to thwart evil and stop civil wars, but it never works out the way we plan and sometimes we make things 10x worse...
 

Chris

Well-Known TRIBEr
No clear solution praktik, I agree, yet, if chemical weapons were used, then, from my position, I would use military action.

For me, that's a red line. Knowing full well, that said will make the situation worse across the board.
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

acheron

TRIBE Member
Iraq might have been about oil but look who's benefitting from it:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/03/w...benefits-of-iraq-oil-boom.html?pagewanted=all

"“We lost out,” said Michael Makovsky, a former Defense Department official in the Bush administration who worked on Iraq oil policy. “The Chinese had nothing to do with the war, but from an economic standpoint they are benefiting from it, and our Fifth Fleet and air forces are helping to assure their supply.”"
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
In my opinion this is a distraction away from the economy, and a stab at china and russia which is the end goal (after Iran)... if they do nothing the BRICS will have their new monetary system online and the american dollar loses reserve status and the west implodes.

If they go to war, wartime spending starts, conscription(already being legislated in the US & UK) and buildup and all of a sudden, the economy crashing doesn't matter and budgets blow wide open because they'll be able to legislate whatever spending they want. (they are nearing the budget ceiling again right now, this is desperation)

The military industrial complex has nothing to lose, they are instigating this on both sides. If they go to War, I'm sure Obama will stay in office magically.

America has gone rogue and this is all just more British imperialism with the goal of total control and new world order.

The thing is, people are seeing through it all and they are losing control.

Interesting - so we have:

- Obama third term
- Conscription
- Currency crisis

All wrapped up in the Syria crisis? What room is there for a "natural" flow of events in syria directed by the historical/domestic factors there?

The issue I have with these analyses is that all world events are explained by dint of their connection to American perspectives/factors - little room for the way Assad and Syrians, their regional friends and enemies and other Great Powers change the game and effect events.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
No clear solution praktik, I agree, yet, if chemical weapons were used, then, from my position, I would use military action.

For me, that's a red line. Knowing full well, that said will make the situation worse across the board.

Don't sign up for suicide pacts! Usually a bad idea...;)
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
Iraq might have been about oil but look who's benefitting from it:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/03/w...benefits-of-iraq-oil-boom.html?pagewanted=all

"“We lost out,” said Michael Makovsky, a former Defense Department official in the Bush administration who worked on Iraq oil policy. “The Chinese had nothing to do with the war, but from an economic standpoint they are benefiting from it, and our Fifth Fleet and air forces are helping to assure their supply.”"

I really think it was less about oil and more about kicking ass after 9/11 to "send a message" and the particular hate-on for Iraq that all of Bush's adviser's had (Project for a New American Century Crew)...

You lay that on top of the fact that yes, Iraq sits in the middle of what post-war American planners called (and everybody else knows) is the "most stupendous geopolitical prize" in the world, and you basically have a confluence of ideology and geopolitical factors paving the way to war. However with Iraq contained Saudi Arabia and the other regional friends who were threatened by a militarily agressive Saddam were chill and sending the black gold their way - so in many ways the geopolitics were already satisfied by the containment status quo and going to war could even be seen as a threat to that stability if geopolitics were your pure motivation...

That said the Americans didn't seem to think through those kinds of scenarios and upsetting the apple cart didnt seem to carry much risk in their minds - nothing some solid American soldiering couldn't fix (on the cheap!) To many of them I think the goal of being seen to kick ass was really the primary geopolitical drive, not oil (more of a secondary convenience then a primary motivator)
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders
Top