• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Team Biden: Neocon Light?

Elixir said:
This that (the bold part):

we (the US) let the Russians destroy a large convoy of oil tanker trucks
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Oh, that that. Well that was an attempt at blatant sarcasm, implying that the US knew of the ISIS oil shipments to Turkey. But for some reason didn't care, even though the US was purportedly there primarily to crush ISIS...
 
funinspace said:
Elixir said:
This that (the bold part):

we (the US) let the Russians destroy a large convoy of oil tanker trucks
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Oh, that that. Well that was an attempt at blatant sarcasm, implying that the US knew of the ISIS oil shipments to Turkey. But for some reason didn't care, even though the US was purportedly there primarily to crush ISIS...
Click to expand...

Trump was pleased to give Putin the opportunity to show why we (the US) should be sympathetic to him.
 
Elixir said:
funinspace said:
Oh, that that. Well that was an attempt at blatant sarcasm, implying that the US knew of the ISIS oil shipments to Turkey. But for some reason didn't care, even though the US was purportedly there primarily to crush ISIS...
Click to expand...

Trump was pleased to give Putin the opportunity to show why we (the US) should be sympathetic to him.
Click to expand...
In 2015? That is the oil convoy event I was talking about...no comprendo...
 
funinspace said:
Elixir said:
funinspace said:
Oh, that that. Well that was an attempt at blatant sarcasm, implying that the US knew of the ISIS oil shipments to Turkey. But for some reason didn't care, even though the US was purportedly there primarily to crush ISIS...
Click to expand...

Trump was pleased to give Putin the opportunity to show why we (the US) should be sympathetic to him.
Click to expand...
In 2015? That is the oil convoy event I was talking about...no comprendo...
Click to expand...

Lol! My bad... mis-remembered.
 
funinspace said:
Elixir said:
This that (the bold part):

we (the US) let the Russians destroy a large convoy of oil tanker trucks
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Oh, that that. Well that was an attempt at blatant sarcasm, implying that the US knew of the ISIS oil shipments to Turkey. But for some reason didn't care, even though the US was purportedly there primarily to crush ISIS...
Click to expand...

Oh, we know the reasons, John Kerry stated them quite clearly.
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Biden's handlers are pushing Biden to push Ukraine to war with Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea.

Why?
Click to expand...
Hard to tell who is doing what and why. Ukrainian government could have their own reasons to start a new war. Their handling of C19 pandemics has not been great to say the least. Plus Ukraine was recently denied some new loans because of lack of progress in reforms. And Nord Stream 2 is slowly moving toward completion. Little war can fix all of that.
 
Harry Bosch said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Biden's handlers are pushing Biden to push Ukraine to war with Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea.

Why?
Click to expand...

How is he doing that? But look at a map, Donetsk and Luhansk are in Ukraine.
Click to expand...

They have declared themselves independent. They lack recognition though.

I'm sure there were Sudanese who said "But look at a map, South Sudan is in Sudan".
 
I'm quite against leaving Afghanistan. Not because it means we didn't do well there (that bus left nearly two decades ago!), but because we'll be abandoning those are that better off in the quagmire, than the Taliban theocracy that'll be returning. A theocracy that'll likely not look kindly to women that learned how to read.

I also ponder whether "quagmire" is the right term. We have 3,000 to 10,000 troops in Afghanistan, not doing much fighting, and things are better than they will be with their absence.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
I'm quite against leaving Afghanistan. Not because it means we didn't do well there (that bus left nearly two decades ago!), but because we'll be abandoning those are that better off in the quagmire, than the Taliban theocracy that'll be returning. A theocracy that'll likely not look kindly to women that learned how to read.
Click to expand...
Yes, it will get worse for some time when the Taliban return. Right now the US spends at least in the low 50 billions of dollars a year keeping this stalemate operational. It also comes with about 6,000 dead Afghans a year. And if we (the US) leaves in 20 years, after another trillion dollars flushed, the Taliban will then take over...


I also ponder whether "quagmire" is the right term. We have 3,000 to 10,000 troops in Afghanistan, not doing much fighting, and things are better than they will be with their absence.
Click to expand...
It appears from a quick review that the Taliban has been gaining further ground in the last couple years of drawing down soldiers, so it is even questionable if this lower soldier count is sustainable for many more years. And 10-20% of those soldiers playing checkers will come back with PTSD issues. And for not fighting, they some how perform 7,000+ bombing/drone attacks a year to keep the low US soldier count in place without the stalemate becoming ever further lost ground. Never mind the peripheral impact to neighboring countries due to this never ending war.

Personally, I'd rather spend $50 billion a year providing real help to 3rd world countries that isn't mostly stolen...but then again that would be another fantasy as our Congressional Critters would never do that. They can spend tens of billions bombing the shit out of countries, but not much for direct aid.
 
So... I'm no math whiz but lesse here... $50b/yr for say, 5000 troops.... $10m / year / person deployed...

No wonder Eric Prince is making such bank.
 
So now that Biden has announced he's ending the war in Afghanistan and pulling all troops out, is he still a neocon?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom