Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Mar 29 06:00:28 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / Biden is a War Criminal
Renzo Marquez
Member
Thu Feb 25 20:25:04
http://news.trust.org/item/20210225224858-6eitm

EXCLUSIVE-U.S. carries out airstrike against Iranian-backed militia target in Syria, officials say
kargen
Member
Thu Feb 25 20:29:21
People have been saying this is really just Obama's third term.
habebe
Member
Thu Feb 25 20:47:49
As much as I dont like Irans regime and its allies....Why are we in Syria?

Cant we just load up the Saudis with weapons and let then fight it out?
Sam Adams
Member
Thu Feb 25 21:28:13
http://mobile.twitter.com/jrpsaki/status/850173258540474368

Rofl retarded hypocrits, the lot of em
smart dude
Member
Thu Feb 25 22:51:09
"People have been saying..."

lol, Trumpspeak
werewolf dictator
Member
Fri Feb 26 00:27:27
"Cant we just load up the Saudis with weapons and let then fight it out?"

saudi military budget is like several times that of yemen's entire gdp.. and saudi government can't defeat just houthi faction alone

obama and saudis were arming rebel jihadis in syria [which biden opposed to his credit].. problem is that rebels turned into isis in east syria and were dominated by al nusra [aka al qaeda] in west syria
habebe
Member
Fri Feb 26 00:34:07
www, These Yemeni fighters, do they not have foreign benefactors?

These type of wars last a long time. The US military budget is astronomical compared to Afghanistan and yet here we are.20 years later.
Paramount
Member
Fri Feb 26 01:48:46
” Cant we just load up the Saudis with weapons and let then fight it out?”

You already did that.
ConcernedJew
Member
Fri Feb 26 04:09:13
Great news! All Iranian assets in Syria must be destroyed.
obaminated
Member
Fri Feb 26 10:00:17
Glad to know within bidens first 60 days he has already carried out military strikes. What a warmonger.
Y2A
Member
Fri Feb 26 10:07:51
here come the hypocrites that didn't give a damn about the strike against the iranian general that almost started another war.
Y2A
Member
Fri Feb 26 10:08:10
let me guess, the national debt is now a serious issue too?
obaminated
Member
Fri Feb 26 10:13:52
Trump had the balls to humiliate iran on a global stage and force Iran to do nothing about it and trump also forced the conflict to end in one strike. Biden is starting yet another proxy war in the middle east.
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 26 10:37:28
Y2a, In all fairness I would be ok. Biden wiping out mist of the higher ups in Iran and Hezzbollah.

I may or may not be cool with this air strike. What does it really accomplish? If its just a tit for that, than its stupid. If it really set them back militarily, I would look more favorably on it.

Soleimani was a big blow. I would have preferred however that Israel or SA/Egypt did it. But oh well.
Y2A
Member
Fri Feb 26 10:41:24
"What does it really accomplish? If its just a tit for that, than its stupid. If it really set them back militarily, I would look more favorably on it."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Shayrat_missile_strike
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 26 11:11:31
Didn't read too much, gonna guess it was a tit for tat attack from Trump?

Keep in mind that Just because I supported Trump doesn't mean I agree with all of his actions and or ideas.

As a matter of fact I think one of the worst things to happen to US politics is that we debate people and not IDEAS* anymore.

I like being able to have an actual opinion on each issue rather than locking myself down to a politicians ideas because I support or don't support him/her.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 12:12:10
news: US intel report finds Saudi crown prince (MBS) responsible for Khashoggi killing

no more putting 100% trust Trump's easily manipulated brain cell & made-up reality based just on what he wants to be true
Forwyn
Member
Fri Feb 26 12:23:08
"The President needs to lay out a comprehensive strategy in Syria in consultation with Congress - and he needs to do it now."

-Kamala Harris, 4/4/18
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 12:27:24
the attack wasn't about Syria... Iranian forces launched a rocket attack, so we blew up some of their stuff

if you have a problem w/ it, you're anti-semitic
Forwyn
Member
Fri Feb 26 12:58:42
Soleimani was an enemy of the U.S., but President Trump's actions put more American lives at risk and could lead to a new war in the Middle East — with no plan for what happens next. The Administration must fully brief and make its case to Congress ASAP.

-Kamala Harris, 1/3/20
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Feb 26 13:04:47
Forwyn
It was a debate!
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 13:05:37
this was a retaliatory strike

whereas for Soleimani the T admin lied to the people (as was standard practice) that he was preparing an imminent attack
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 26 13:34:01
There's always a Tweet:

"Kamala Harris
@KamalaHarris

I strongly support our men and women in uniform and believe we must hold Assad accountable for his unconscionable use of chemical weapons. But I am deeply concerned about the legal rationale of last night’s strikes.

2:13 PM · Apr 14, 2018·Twitter for Android"

http://mob...rris/status/985219586881675264
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 14:59:33
except this strike had nothing to do w/ Assad
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 26 15:02:07
Hack (tw's name going forward) -

The strike happened in Syrian territory without the consent of the Syrian government. You bet your ass Assad had something to do with it.
Forwyn
Member
Fri Feb 26 15:03:38
Retaliatory strikes against Syria are totally different than retaliatory strikes against Iran in Syria!

lulz tw
habebe
Member
Fri Feb 26 15:04:25
Also what is the legal authority for strikes? Assad is a brutal dictator. But Syria is a sovereign country.

-Interacial pornstar Jen Psaki

from Sam's link.
habebe
Member
Fri Feb 26 15:04:56
For context the comment was a few years ago during the Trump Administration.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 15:56:15
we weren't striking Syria (or it's gov't) this time is the point... there IS a difference

(& the 2018 strikes weren't retaliation for attacks on -us-)

not that i want to argue the points or merits... just noting it IS substantially different
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 15:58:13
if a squirrel is throwing nuts at you from a neighbors tree & you throw a snowball at it, did you attack your neighbor?
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 26 16:04:40
Oh my God you are such a hack

Iran's military presence in Syria has the blessing and approval of the Syrian government. They are there on the government's invite.

Our military strike in Syria did not have the approval of the Syrian government, and they would have said no if we had asked.

The strike was akin to China bombing a British military unit that the US had invited to conduct joint war exercises with just outside of Los Angeles. Such an attack would definitely be viewed as an act of aggression by the US, even if it wasn't US military hardware that was hit.

But of course we know that trying to use logic here is futile; you support the strike because Trump didn't order it, and that's the be-all end-all determinant of whether something is good or bad in your mind.

H. A. C. K.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 16:19:18
and yet... it IS a very notable difference

when we got OBL, that was in Pakistan, without permission... was it the same as bombing Pakistan? not remotely

your British unit would've had to have attacked China first, plus -OF COURSE- it wouldn't be viewed the same as if China just attacked our military

how can you even think it's similar?... hack
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 26 16:30:25
"and yet... it IS a very notable difference"

No it fucking isn't. Things in Syrian territory were bombed.

"when we got OBL, that was in Pakistan, without permission"

"when we got OBL, that was in Pakistan, without permission... was it the same as bombing Pakistan?"

Pakistan certainly thought so:

"The day after the raid, the Pakistani government lashed out at the U.S., saying that the United States had taken "an unauthorized unilateral action" that would not be tolerated in the future. The foreign ministry further said, "Such an event shall not serve as a future precedent for any state, including the United States."[31]

Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir said, "Any other country that would ever act on assumption that it has the right to unilateralism of any sort will find as far as Pak is concerned that it has made a basic mistake".[32] He further stated that Pakistani military had scrambled F-16s after they became aware of the attack but that they reached the compound after American helicopters had left.[33] Bashir also warned the U.S. and India against any such covert operations in the future, saying this would lead to a "terrible catastrophe".[32][34][35]

Former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf criticized the operation, saying, "America coming to our territory and taking action is a violation of our sovereignty, handling and execution of the operation [by U.S. forces] is not correct. The Pakistani government should have been kept in the loop.""

http://en....o_the_death_of_Osama_bin_Laden

"your British unit would've had to have attacked China first"

So you'd be okay with China bombing American territory in that situation. Holy shit.

"how can you even think it's similar?"

Well you see there are these things on pieces of paper called borders, and within those borders a national government enjoys exclusive rights to sovereignty...

This is International Law 101. You hack.
obaminated
Member
Fri Feb 26 16:32:32
Holy shit tw has officiallly gone past he level of hackery. This is amazing.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 16:43:23
you people are being the obvious hacks

if we had attacked actual Pakistan, they'd have issued more than an angry statement

bombing actual Syrian property & not in retaliation to attacks on us is -obviously- different than bombing non-Syrian property (that happens to be in Syria) in retaliation for attacks on us

...not that you people are good at spotting the obvious
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Feb 26 17:04:25
Y2A
Member Fri Feb 26 10:07:51
"here come the hypocrites that didn't give a damn about the strike against the iranian general that almost started another war."

Incorrect. I condemned Trump for murdering Soleimani (and for his own strikes against Syria).
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 26 17:04:58
I swear to God I'm on the verge of pulling a Hot Rod and posting the entire Wikipedia article on "Sovereignty" here.

You are turning me into Hot Rod, Hack. I hope you're happy.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Feb 26 17:05:46
tumbleweed
the wanderer Fri Feb 26 12:12:10
"news: US intel report finds Saudi crown prince (MBS) responsible for Khashoggi killing

no more putting 100% trust Trump's easily manipulated brain cell & made-up reality based just on what he wants to be true"

And Biden will do nothing about it. It is funny how you and the Media-Americans are more concerned about Khashoggi than the thousands of Yemenis Saudi Barbaria has starved and murdered.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Feb 26 17:09:24
tumbleweed
the wanderer Fri Feb 26 12:27:24
"the attack wasn't about Syria... Iranian forces launched a rocket attack, so we blew up some of their stuff"

That doesn't make it better. The rocket attack occurred in Iraq. The targets in Syria were not the perpetrators. Even the pro-Biden media acknowledges that the illegal attack was conducted "to send a message." Collective punishment violates our treaty obligations (which you forgot about when Biden was sworn in) and there is no "send a message" exception to the War Powers Act.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 26 17:39:48
"That doesn't make it better."

i said i wasn't arguing the merits here (of any strike by anyone), just am disagreeing w/ people claiming hypocrisy when the situations totally different

here's David French's legal analysis (an original recipe Republican):

"
in the aftermath of Biden's strikes--here's a quick legal explainer on the different kinds of military actions and the different constitutional/legal justifications, in case you're interested. /1

First, it's important to remember that presidents of both parties have largely ignored the Constitution and have stretched their Article II commander-in-chief powers up to and past the breaking point. So this thread is about what should be, not what is. /2

Presidents SHOULD seek congressional approval before initiating hostilities against foreign regimes/entities not engaged in active hostilities against the U.S. Examples--Obama attacking the Gaddafi regime, Trump attacking Assad regime. /3

HOWEVER, presidents do have inherent authority to order to troops in the field to take actions to defend themselves against hostile entities who have attacked American forces. Examples -- Trump hitting Soleimani, Biden bombing pro-Iran militias yesterday. /4

For example, here's what I wrote in Time after Trump's attack against Soleimani. /5 [has an attached image snippet of why he found Soleimani legal, link below]

But here's a problematic gray area--how much should American deployments continue to rely on the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force? It's past time for Congress to revisit, revise, and update existing authorizations to reflect present challenges. /6
"
http://twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1365364099471843337

argue w/ him if you want
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Feb 26 17:50:55
tumbleweed
the wanderer Fri Feb 26 17:39:48
"here's David French's legal analysis (an original recipe Republican)"

An original recipe cuckold. There's zero evidence that this was troops "taking actions to defend themselves." Americans aren't even in Syria lawfully. The Iranian militias are and they have not attacked Americans there.
Dukhat
Member
Fri Feb 26 19:47:02
I'm ok with bombing the bad guys. The issue with Trump is that he had no real plan to not only bomb the bad guys but give the good guys a path to allying with us and countries not to fall to extremism.

Funny how Biden does basically what any president would do and the Trumpers are all "muh hypocrisy."

Who cares. Trump is gone. If he did something right, it was by accident.
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 26 20:19:09
I think this along with many other situations Republicans look at it like this

If it was Trump dlong the same exact actions the left wpild cry foul.

The left often agrees because of thwir assumption that it was Trump the greatest threat since Hitler so it's different om the basis that its Trump.
obaminated
Member
Fri Feb 26 20:44:48
Tw and cuckhat running to defend biden by bringing trump into into it. Losers.
Forwyn
Member
Fri Feb 26 21:16:53
"The issue with Trump is that he had no real plan to not only bomb the bad guys but give the good guys a path to allying with us and countries not to fall to extremism."

Which nation was in danger of falling to extremism, that Trump needed to prevent?
werewolf dictator
Member
Fri Feb 26 21:21:17
biden had chance to rejoin jcpoa

instead he signals if iran first goes back to complying with deal trump broke.. then he's willing to talk about deal again [probably along with need of iran to additionally abandon missile programs]

then when iran proxies kill 1 contractor in retaliation for trump killing soleimani and 9 others.. biden launches escalating airstrikes that kill 20 shiites on iraq-syria border who were there to suppress isis.. biden likely choosing target not because those were same people who killed contractor.. but because he's zionist puppet who has always wanted usa forces in east syria and who doesn't like shia in control of east-west roads

even in dealing with iran where trump was a fuckup.. biden seems on course to be no improvement but instead even worse
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 26 21:32:31
Come on guys

He bombed to de escalate. This is bombing for peace.

I mean look at all it accomplished....

Plus Trump did it, so its cool.
werewolf dictator
Member
Fri Feb 26 21:39:24
killing 20 shiites for 1 contractor [after usa/trump was initial aggressor - certainly according to democrats at time] is escalatory.. not de-escalatory
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 26 21:53:07
http://youtu.be/10w4MhIEr7Q

Just going to leave this link here.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Sat Feb 27 06:00:24
This should go over well with the locals. River of Blood is probably getting his lube ready.

http://www...en-us-death-toll-b1808097.html

"None of those killed in the attack were Iranian, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), a generally credible monitoring group based in London. So many deaths could prompt cries of revenge by the Iraqi militiamen’s comrades or extended families or tribes, possibly imperiling the moderate, pro-western Kadhimi government in Baghdad."
Paramount
Member
Sat Feb 27 06:51:10
So the US wanted to bomb some Iranians (who are fighting ISIS) but bombed some Iraqis who were also fighting ISIS probably.

I wonder if the King of Saudi told Biden when they were speaking the other day.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Sat Feb 27 06:55:49
More likely that Bibi reminded Biden he has those Epstein tapes.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Wed Mar 03 07:31:45
Good thing Biden deescalated.

http://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1367036358351552512

NEW - 10 rockets have hit al-Asad airbase in #Iraq hosting American troops; One civilian contractor dead.
werewolf dictator
Member
Wed Mar 03 14:09:12
biden slogan.. "diplomacy is back"

* appoints blinken as secretary of state.. whose record is supporting iraq war.. supporting libya war.. supporting arming al qaeda dominated rebels in syria.. and supporting saudi-american coalition attack on yemen.. and is thus as much a maniac as hillary clinton or john bolton

* selects andrew sullivan as national security advisor.. a hitlery creature who vomits insane quotes like “AQ [Al Qaeda] is on our side.”


with "diplomacy" like theirs it's not surprising that bombs are falling and rockets launching
habebe
Member
Wed Mar 03 14:25:23
"and is thus as much a maniac as hillary clinton or john bolton
"

That might be a stretch.
werewolf dictator
Member
Wed Mar 03 15:15:13
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share