Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

US Embassy attack, Baghdad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    US Embassy attack, Baghdad

    I am surprised that nobody started this thread, already.

    Well, ghost would never have started this thread, because he wants to defund the military.

    But, this is a remarkable and historic moment.

    The brief: The US embassy in Baghdad is currently under siege by allegedly pro-Iranian attackers. Most officials, including the ambassador, were out for the holidays, thankfully. A contingent of Marine security has been working to keep the embassy secure, and additional troops have been deployed to quell the situation.

    Linkage:
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-complex.html
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/106455...bassy-in-iraq/
    ... and many more.


    Order of operations:
    1. Hezbollah killed a US citizen
    2. US bombed the fuck out of Hezbollah
    3. This current mob attack
    Consider for a moment that there is no meme about brown-haired, brown-eyed step children.

    #2
    Its possible to view this as a tragedy while still believing we should do something about our ridiculous military spending.

    Comment


      #3
      State Department security improvements post-Benghazi at work, likely the reason the Embassy is still standing and the ambassador, alive.

      Para bellum works.
      '�I am no advocate of passivity,� Coffin Mott said in an 1860 speech. �Quakerism, as I understand it, does not mean quietism. The early Friends were agitators; disturbers of the peace; and were more obnoxious in their day to charges, which are now so freely made, than we are.�'

      My Glossary: https://www.bullshido.net/forums/sho...d.php?t=129294

      Comment


        #4
        Send in the MEUs.

        Comment


          #5
          I think Iran's Supreme Leader wants to repeat the Iran hostage crisis, only this time in Iraq, which would effectively castrate the US again in the eyes of pro-theocratic supporters like it did the last 30 years.

          Case in point, they are chanting "death to America" right now, for the cameras mostly, but it will only take one maniac to really set things off.

          This time, Army Apache gunships are doing flybys so there's a little reassurance for a peaceful resolution. A violent solution will only embolden Tehran, because the more protestors die the better, from the Supreme Leader's point of view they are all martyrs.
          '�I am no advocate of passivity,� Coffin Mott said in an 1860 speech. �Quakerism, as I understand it, does not mean quietism. The early Friends were agitators; disturbers of the peace; and were more obnoxious in their day to charges, which are now so freely made, than we are.�'

          My Glossary: https://www.bullshido.net/forums/sho...d.php?t=129294

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Permalost View Post
            Its possible to view this as a tragedy while still believing we should do something about our ridiculous military spending.
            The reality is likely not, but keep in mind our ridiculous military spending is mostly domestic and is very socialist in nature if you consider it.
            As in its not as bad for the US as people think it is.
            I say likely not because its hard to reduce our spending without reducing our capabilities and those capabilities include having bases close enough to reach our embassies, our allies, and our foes in a timely manner.
            Part of the large expense is that we maintain a presence around the globe at all times.
            The up shot of this is that capability is used far more often for humanitarian missions than combat missions.
            The Military is often on scene rapidly for natural disasters and other things that require humanitarian aide.
            Our rapid response to things like this:
            https://www.militarytimes.com/news/2...-gulf-of-oman/

            Of course a big old heaping of retaliation that keeps US citizens, and interest safe doesn't hurt either.

            So its hard to want both the capabilities of these sorts of responses and a cut to the funding that allows it.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Permalost View Post
              Its possible to view this as a tragedy while still believing we should do something about our ridiculous military spending.
              Yeah. Because you can't sit on the fence. If you put people in harm's way then ridiculous spending to protect them is the correct choice.

              If you don't want to spend then you need to remove people from harm's way.

              This is my two legged horse theory.

              If you buy a two legged horse for half the money you haven't saved half you have wasted half.

              This is also exactly how the security industry works by the way.
              Whitsunday Martial Arts Airlie Beach North Queensland.
              http://www.facebook.com/#!/WhitsundayMartialArts

              Comment


                #8
                A people without knowledge of it’s past is like a tree without roots. Marcus Garvey

                In these matters the media could be saying, Iran is behind these attacks because the United States’s CIA destroyed Iran’s democracy (for oil) and put in a puppet dictator whose own secret police were trained by the CIA and who ruthlessly wiped out any opposition and would force parents to watch as their children’s limbs were sawed off. The moderates and liberals were too fearful (or destroyed) and that left only the fanatics willing to face death and torture to oppose the dictator. So the radicals, created by US policies, won eventually, and of course they hate the US as our nation is, as Martin Luther King said, the greatest purveyor of violence in the world.
                "Preparing mentally, the most important thing is, if you aren't doing it for the love of it, then don't do it." - Benny Urquidez

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by patfromlogan View Post
                  US as our nation is, as Martin Luther King said, the greatest purveyor of violence in the world.
                  Objectively incorrect:

                  Their are literally nations that have killed more of their own people than the US has killed in both real and proxy wars.
                  Stalin killed somewhere between 6 to 9 million people, lets not forget that the Soviet Union was often times on the other end of the violence that the US has engaged in.
                  Of course its cool to hate on the US and to ignore the benefits that have been provided to the world because the US sometimes looks out for US interests.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by goodlun View Post
                    Objectively incorrect:

                    Their are literally nations that have killed more of their own people than the US has killed in both real and proxy wars.
                    Stalin killed somewhere between 6 to 9 million people, lets not forget that the Soviet Union was often times on the other end of the violence that the US has engaged in.
                    Of course its cool to hate on the US and to ignore the benefits that have been provided to the world because the US sometimes looks out for US interests.
                    Um civil war?
                    Whitsunday Martial Arts Airlie Beach North Queensland.
                    http://www.facebook.com/#!/WhitsundayMartialArts

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by gregaquaman View Post
                      Um civil war?
                      620,000 people for the US. Of course at the time that was a more significant number as a % of the population but its nothing compared to Stalin, or German's genocide of the Jews.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Nutcracker, sweet! View Post
                        I am surprised that nobody started this thread, already.

                        Well, ghost would never have started this thread, because he wants to defund the military.

                        But, this is a remarkable and historic moment.

                        The brief: The US embassy in Baghdad is currently under siege by allegedly pro-Iranian attackers. Most officials, including the ambassador, were out for the holidays, thankfully. A contingent of Marine security has been working to keep the embassy secure, and additional troops have been deployed to quell the situation.

                        Linkage:
                        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-complex.html
                        https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/106455...bassy-in-iraq/
                        ... and many more.


                        Order of operations:
                        1. Hezbollah killed a US citizen
                        2. US bombed the fuck out of Hezbollah
                        3. This current mob attack
                        Believing that the military could be streamlined a bit and still function effectively doesn't make me opposed to any kind of military action nor does it mean I don't think we need a powerful military. Keep that straw man shit going if it makes you feel good I guess.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
                          Believing that the military could be streamlined a bit and still function effectively doesn't make me opposed to any kind of military action nor does it mean I don't think we need a powerful military. Keep that straw man shit going if it makes you feel good I guess.
                          Cool you still didn't tell me what capabilities your willing to lose in order to "stream line" the Military

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by goodlun View Post
                            Cool you still didn't tell me what capabilities your willing to lose in order to "stream line" the Military
                            Maybe start by putting an end to the "spend your entire budget or else" mentality that seems to be damn near ubiquitous. You have any idea how much perfectly functional equipment the Navy deliberately throws overboard before returning to Port?

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by ghost55 View Post
                              Maybe start by putting an end to the "spend your entire budget or else" mentality that seems to be damn near ubiquitous. You have any idea how much perfectly functional equipment the Navy deliberately throws overboard before returning to Port?
                              A lot less than you think, and that is not the way they spend their budget or else. The Navy has little trouble spending their budget cause going to Sea is fucking ridiculously expensive.
                              Its expensive for EVERYONE that goes to sea.
                              End of budget year spending is also not as wasteful as you think, its just when departments know they can spend the money they have without worry about getting fucked over by surprises.
                              I also buy equipment year end, not cause its a luxury its just when I know I still have that money to spend, because something silly didn't get damaged at sea or something else.
                              This is true for all the program managers I know, its not luxury spending its spending that is desperately needed but perhaps not as needed as other spending. Still sound spending non the less.

                              Comment

                              Collapse

                              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                              Working...
                              X