Reply With Quote
Mercenary nation
I knew choosing Ketchup as Secretary of State would be the gift that keeps on giving
hope and change allright
What the ? Have these people lost their ing minds?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...e-2467ba30e5e3
Secretary of State John Kerry said at Wednesday’s hearing that Arab counties have offered to pay for the entirety of unseating President Bashar al-Assad if the United States took the lead militarily.
“With respect to Arab countries offering to bear costs and to assess, the answer is profoundly yes,” Kerry said. “They have. That offer is on the table.”
Asked by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) about how much those countries would contribute, Kerry said they have offered to pay for all of a full invasion.
“In fact, some of them have said that if the United States is prepared to go do the whole thing the way we’ve done it previously in other places, they’ll carry that cost,” Kerry said. “That’s how dedicated they are at this. That’s not in the cards, and nobody’s talking about it, but they’re talking in serious ways about getting this done.
Mercenary nation
hope and change allright
Mercenary nation
hope and change allright
Does that part of the quote not matter?
yeah, nobody's talking about it...except the conversation we had where they offered to finance it. Except for that conversation, nobody is talking about that.
I think that's what is called a "trial balloon"...will people be OK if we invade Syria as long as someone else pays for it?
Look, I think that Obama has been a complete fool on this issue, and if he had kept his f%$#%^%$ mouth shut instead of posturing about a 'red' line, we might not be in this mess right now.
But having said that, there is zero evidence that Obama has the slightest interest in having the U.S. work as mercenaries for the Arab nations.
There is nothing in his actions now or over the last x years that would indicate that he would accept that, much less push for it. He is not, for all his faults, another George W.
John Kerry saying on the record that some Arab states would LIKE us to play that role doesn't mean squat for saying what Obama wants to do or doesn't want to do.
I honestly believe that you are over-reading this one, CC.
so now it's safe to say every major presidential candidate since gore (lmao) has been a war mongerer.
Yes, I am familiar with the items in the article you referenced. And no, I don't like the fact that Obama has continued most if not all of Bush's foreign policy initiatives. But Obama has NOT started a war (yet) that is based on no reason other than he hates the head of government, like Bush did in Iraq.
And no, I am not a Democrat who turns a blind eye when Obama does things that Bush did. I'm not a democrat at all and didn't vote that way in the last election.
BUT...what Obama is (imo) reasonably faulted for is his idiotic penchant for shooting off his mouth in ways that get the entire country into trouble (like making a claim about a 'red-line that he can't back up)...or like he did with respect to Gitmo.
That fault of Obama's is based on his extreme naiveté that seems to have all the critical thinking aspects of "I believe that if you are just nice to people they will be nice back". Didn't work with Republicans, didn't work with Russia, didn't work with almost anyone at all.
Could be. But the fact that we are even considering committing US forces to support known Al Qaeda factions in Syria after what they did on 9/11 just blows me away.
It's a civil war between two bad choices. Launching a few cruise missiles and smart bombs and blowing up a few more non-combatants isn't gonna solve a ing thing. and if it does, and Assad is overthrown we may end up with something even worse. What exactly is our end game here?
Saudis have a lot of stake. They felt their collars tighten while watching the Arab Spring uprisings.
They will not have that and the bombings in Lebanon, promise of $12 billion to the Egyptian army to control Muslim Brotherhood, and now, Regime change in Syria to protect their Eastern province where most of their oil reserves are concentrated are all not only ambitious moves, but moves to protect their livelyhoods. At least that is according to Prince Bandar Bush Bin Satan, the engineer of the NEW MIDDLE EAST.
as I said before, US is just a puppet and Saudi will not let something like democracy or money stand in the way of protecting their trillions. They are in a fight for survival and they have unlimited funds.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/on-...ism-shia-sunni
Saudi Arabia has been in the news because of its staunch support for the military-backed government in Cairo – part of its wider strategy of resisting the Muslim Brotherhood and rolling back change. But closer to home the Saudis also back Bahrain's Al Khalifa rulers, a Sunni dynasty facing down protests by the island state's Shia and democratic opposition.
Toby Matthiesen's new study of the Gulf counter-revolutions demonstrates how the Saudis, Bahrain and Kuwait have all combined repression and cash handouts with an almost instinctive sectarianism to keep demands for reform at bay.
The Saudis had long fretted about unrest in their predominantly Shia eastern province — the heartland of the kingdom's oil industry. But when republican dictators were being toppled in Tunis, Cairo and Tripoli and revolution was in the air just across the Gulf in Manama, anti-Shia feeling was ratcheted up with the mass arrests of local activists who were accused of being part of a "foreign conspiracy." It was supposedly led by Iran, but beyond shrill propaganda from Tehran and dark hints about "sleeper cells," there is no evidence of that.
Another "Coalition Of The Billing", like the First Gulf War
Saudis would like Iran's influence lessened in Syria, which also has big influence in Lebanon, as would USA and Israel.
Assuming this is a legitimate option, the Arabs are saying "Hey, we'd love to watch Americans die in this never-ending power struggle with Islam vs. your ideologies... In fact, we like the idea so much we'll fund the whole thing."
No matter how hard the media trys to spin it, the Arabic nations will never see our military presence in a positive light. Clearly they're not interested in being our buddies that we look after time to time.
that is what the pretext is, but in truth it is just to quell the Arab Spring uprising. People are giving Iran way too much credit if they believe Iran is responsible for the Arab Springs and the victories of the Muslim Brotherhood
Bandar Bush Bin Satan is just a Saudi NEOCON that has aspirations to win the Middle East like morons such as Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush and Karl Rove before him
this has nothing to do with Ideologies
this is about cold hard cash and oil resources and regional strategies to deliver gas/oil to the mass markets at the highest price possible
Saudi kings don't give a if you worship Satan as long as they have their billions, planes, vacations and pros utes(female AND male btw)
Last edited by cheguevara; 09-04-2013 at 04:50 PM.
Well, if we gonna out, can I at least get a check?
This right here is what's worse than everything... that the public. Obama supporters, and msm is letting them get away with. supporting Al Qaeda. Frickin amazing.
Obama didn't give himself the NPP.
but he did receive it gladly while his Drone War strategy was sitting on his desk
It wasn't like he said...c'mon guys...Gandhi deserves it more than I do...
He sure did accept it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
