What will Washington do when they realize no one believes their bullshit excuses for war?

[yurbud]

Syria may or may not have used chemical weapons, but people aren't buying that that's a good enough reason to bomb the crap out of them, and probably a large percentage know that is not even remotely why our government would do so anyway.

When the reality that their schtick isn't working seeps into that bubble of hubris and bought and paid for conviction in Washington, what will they do?

This moment in history is reminding me of Rush Limbaugh calling that college girl a slut. He had done far worse in the past, but somehow, that was the event that triggered his undoing.

This planned Syria attack may not be the worst, most reckless, or criminal thing our government has done, but it may be the hit and run that makes us finally take away their foreign policy car keys.

[polichick]

1. At least a lot of people will get that the mic runs this gov't...

Eisenhower's warning way back when was not for nothing.

[yurbud]

2. yep. It just took half a century to soak in. Or as our "centrist" friends here would say...

he was just a conspiracy theory crackpot.

[polichick]

3. Ha! I'll bet there really are people here who think that.

[Rockyj]

46. So true!

Tell me if this isn't why Military Industrial Complex wants us to strike!
"More than a year ago, a $10 billion Pipelineistan deal was clinched between Iran, Iraq and Syria for a natural gas pipeline to be built by 2016 from Iran's giant South Pars field, traversing Iraq and Syria, with a possible extension to Lebanon. Key export target market: Europe."

"...Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline would be essential to diversify Europe's energy supplies away from Russia."

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/201285133440424621.html”

[OKDem08]

4. it's a watershed moment

Could be the start of something big.

[HooptieWagon]

5. Good point.

NSA spying on Americans and TPP are certainly more important issues than bombing an already war-torn country. But a military strike on Syria is just so pointless it could be a watershed moment. A limited strike on Assad has no strategic or tactical benefit...it will accomplish nothing, except cause more civilian deaths and make the situation worse. International and domestic opinion seem to agree this is just a stupid pissing contest between Obama and Assad.

[JEB]

6. I must be getting cynical

because I think those that profit from war are calling the shots and us peons can piss and moan all we want.

[wildbilln864]

16. you know you're right! n/t

[LearningCurve]

20. I join you in Club Cynical

eom

[Coyotl]

7. The price of crude is already up. Mission accomplished!

[sulphurdunn]

9. The price of gas here

has gone up $0.06 a gallon since the sun set.

[fascisthunter]

8. hire trolls to flood forums with propaganda

[yurbud]

11. that's not working and I'm not sure if it ever did

It mostly just annoys us here and clogs up the pipes.

[fascisthunter]

12. true!

But those in charge aren't as smart as most think they are.

[Junkdrawer]

10. Do the David Cameron backpedal?

[MannyGoldstein]

14. Everyone should see this video.

Thank you.

[ProSense]

13. Call

France?

Readout of the President’s Phone Call with President Hollande of France
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023566303

"What will Washington do when they realize no one believes their bullshit excuses for war?"

Who offered "excuses for war"?

I mean, there's a lot of raging against an action that hasn't been announced.

[MannyGoldstein]

15. Are you thinking the White House is not about to commit an act of war against Syria?

Really?

[ProSense]

17. "About to"?

I know they haven't announced any plans to go to war.

[yurbud]

18. what would you call it if someone bombed us?

[ProSense]

21. Did we launch a chemical attack on our people?

"what would you call it if someone bombed us?"

Bombing is clearly a military action, but again, who announced a bombing campaign? Did anyone even announce a missile strike?

[Zoeisright]

22. Exactly.

But apparently helping people who are being incinerated by chemical weapons isn't in the playbook for some here.

[JEB]

25. Fallujah

http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f10/white-phosphorus-victims-38908/

[yurbud]

40. and you help them by incinerating the survivors?

[yurbud]

27. we did it to the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, and earlier, to Bosnia

as well as Obama's robo-bombings by drone.

If Obama hasn't announced his intention to do so, why is their so much talk about it and attempt to line up allies to go along with it?

[sabrina 1]

35. We used White Phosphorous in Iraq and DU

in Iraq 1 and Agent Orange in Vietnam. What were the consequences to the criminals who did that? Did anyone ever suggest bombing the US to 'teach them a lesson' for breaking the law?

Should a country be bombed each time they use chemical weapons? And who should make that decision?

And where is the proof the US has that it was the Syrian Govt. Cameron was unable to answer that question which is why the UK voted against it. Did the US not share their 'proof' with one of their closest allies so he could sway Parliament to vote for intervention?

All I've seen them say is 'trust us' and some videos which could be anything.

And why do not want the UN to finish their investigation?

[yurbud]

41. you still didn't answer my question: what would you call it if another country bombed us?

[rug]

19. Talk about 60 votes in the Senate. Legalize marijuana. Get another dog. Kill a fly.

[JEB]

23. If we want to take out war criminals

why not a surgical strike in Wyoming or Texas. I'm sure our all seeing eye knows the exact location of W and Dead Eye Dick at all times.

[Jack Rabbit]

24. Hire more spooks so the NSA can keep a sharper eye on us?

We are the enemy, after all.

[another_liberal]

26. They obviously don't care what we don't believe.

Last edited Sat Aug 31, 2013, 01:49 AM - Edit history (1)

They seem to be serving other masters. After all, they know we can be counted on to vote for someone other than the Republican asshole who the Republicans assholes choose to run. They are right, we will do so, but what a waste of opportunity to really make a difference here in our own country! They are prepared to throw all of that away so that the MIC can make another pile of money and AIPAC can glory in the destruction (they assume) of Hezbollah's principal ally.

It is beyond sad.

[yurbud]

28. yeah, I think it has degenerated to pro forma lip service. Next time, they won't bother to announce

it or give an explanation.

[another_liberal]

29. We'll know we're in another war when we hear a chant of, "U, S, A!"

Of course, we'll also see a whole shitload of Chinese-made, American flags everywhere.

[bluedeathray]

30. They realize that NOW

But their true masters are paying them quite well enough to maintain the status quo.

And Dog knows no one is putting enough pressure on them, political or otherwise, to make them consider change.

Planned Syria attack from the Nobel Peace Prize winner?! He deserves every bit of heat he gets from pursuing this path.

[Flying Squirrel]

31. They probably figure public opinion will go up after the strikes

We all like the fireworks, don't we?

[ThirdWayCowplop]

32. If they really cared about public opinion they would not do half the stuff they do.

They being the vast majority of politicians.


If all one has left is bitching on the internet about Government then they have won, you are doing what they want. See on the internet they can control YOU and they know where you are at, as in you are home in your basement bitching on the internet.

They are not scared of your vote because voting can be rigged, what they do care about is enough people getting pissed off and storming the Bastille so to speak.

There is only one way to change it, get the money out of politics, until then job #1 for those we elect is fund raising, so unless you are bringing money to your elected official, you and your concerns or issues or whatever will not matter. Oh they will pretend in order to keep up the illusion and it will look and make you feel good but that is what they are good at, duping the uninformed.

[Scuba]

33. Kick

[Donald Ian Rankin]

34. What will you do when you realise that lots of people do?

Leaving aside the controversial question of whether or not Obama *is* telling the truth when he says that use of chemical weapons are the last straw that have led him to consider bombing Syria, or whether it *is* a "bullshit excuse", it's *not* controversial or debatable that quite a lot of people believe him, and *think* that it isn't..

So your claim is simply obviously wrong, I'm afraid.

I think you're confusing "I and some other people think X" with "everyone thinks X".

[sabrina 1]

36. Well it looks like the Brits don't believe him. That's a pretty important vote of no

confidence. Cameron had the opportunity to present the evidence to Parliament, they debated for hours, he was asked over and over again. Just saying 'trust us' didn't work there and in the end they voted against intervention because of a lack of proof. Not to mention many of them pointed the US' own use of chemical weapons.

Iow, many members of Parliament said that the US 'doesn't have the moral authority' to judge these matters.

[nashville_brook]

37. k and r

[L0oniX]

38. Since when do they give a shit what the little people want or believe...

as long as they are not campaigning for election.

[yurbud]

39. There is some level of public opposition that they fear

I don't know what it is, but when over half the population opposes a military action before it starts, that might qualify since support usually falls off pretty quickly.

[L0oniX]

42. After they refused to deal with gun laws in spite of an over whelming public push...

I think the evidence is in as to what they care about ...and it ain't us.

[yurbud]

43. gun laws are a bit different from war.

for one thing, the cost of gun laws would by nearly negligible in terms of the federal budget.

But military action costs a lot at a time when Washington is poor talking us and making excuses to cut badly needed programs.

Also, it's one thing when the occasional random psycho does the killing, and something else when our government does it in our name with our money.

[L0oniX]

44. My point is that they don't give a fuck what we think or want or don't want. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. What they always do. Find a bigger, scarier, bogeyman to erect and wave the flag.

[bvar22]

47. Thats the Truth:

"Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood.

But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. [font size=3]All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.[/font]"
--- Herman Goering, Spandau Prison, 1946

[Doctor_J]

48. You think they give a shit what we think on any issue?

Where have you been? Turn on the radio or TV some time they tell us what to think and do.

Rush Limbaugh calling that college girl a slut. He had done far worse in the past, but somehow, that was the event that triggered his undoing.

What undoing? Seriously