Putin Op-Ed NYT: Putin's Plea Of Caution

[Socrtease]

First, my position is the exact same position I had when Bush, Clinton, Carter, Bush, Reagan, or anybody else was in office.

Republicans have never been antiwar .. but democrats pretended to be. The hypocrites here are democrats.

Secondly, perhaps you're not seeing the dynamics of a Republican Party metamorphosis surrounding the explosion of antiwar libertarians who are now taking root within the party.

I am aware of all of this. I have never thought you supported war regardless of who was in charge. As for the spontaneous generation of antiwar libertarians in the Republican party? They wouldn't would be there if Obama were not president. It is a pacifism of convenience.

 

[Bonestorm]

What's most interesting is the Putin hate being expressed over his peace initiative and that tells us only one thing. The US is angry that it could be denied it's war. Or at least that it's propagandists will have to work a lot harder to justify war. The first job is now to try to discredit Putin when his initiative has elevated him so greatly in the eyes of the world.

And here's a preview of what's going to come from the UN inspections:
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/p...will_finger_assad_for_massive_chemical_attack

Take special note of how the headlines are contradictory to the main message in the body of the article.

"The inspection team, which is expected on Monday to present U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon with a highly anticipated report on a suspected Aug. 21 nerve agent attack in the suburbs of Damascus, will not directly accuse the Syrian regime of gassing its own people, according to three U.N.-based diplomats familiar with the investigation."

It's still obvious that the US won't be deterred but it's going to take a lot more work. It's just too obvious now that the socalled evidence jthat implicates Assad's regime just doesn't exist.

Carla Del Ponte is still essentially right.

No, she isn't. I've corrected you on this point several times, most recently last night. I haven't the foggiest idea why you continue to lie about it.

And it was unreasonable to expect that the UN investigation team would assign blame for the August 21 attack considering it is not within the scope of its mandate to do so.

The bottom line is that there will be no independent arbiter of whom is responsible for the August 21 attack, ever.

 

[monty1]

I am aware of all of this. I have never thought you supported war regardless of who was in charge. As for the spontaneous generation of antiwar libertarians in the Republican party? They wouldn't would be there if Obama were not president. It is a pacifism of convenience.

That is obviously so true. But the rest of the world doesn't really care what motivates the US right to object to war, just that it does object to war.

The Obama hate just could be the factor that saves the world from another US led war. And something that could be much bigger because Putin and Russia are sitting in a very convenient position as regards world sentiment now.

 

[NOVA]

When the US was doing this very same thing when George W. Bush was president those of you on the right were tonguing his asshole and cleaning his fucking nutsack!

"The US is selling arms from bullets to missiles for years with no clue where they eventually end up....
That is what I said....I said nothing about Bush being 'innocent' of arms selling, so don't put fuckin' words in my mouth I never said....selling weapons by the US has been going on for a century....


This is what bothers me most about this current "anti war" movement. All of the sudden the Right wing is the dove party? You mutherfuckers could not WAIT to go to war in Iraq in 2003. You all creamed your fucking GWB work jeans when he said "yer fer us or agin us". You cheered as we overthrew the anti-jihadist leader of Iraq. Was Saddam a son of bitch? Fuck yes, but he was a secular son of bitch. I sit and read every day how the right is lauding the comments of some other anti war spokesperson, with today's spokesman d'jour being Vladimir fucking Putin. With the exception of a few, if George W. Bush was running the show now and wanted to help the Syrian rebels those on the right would be four square against him. Those on the left would be calling for his head, and only a select few would see this intervention as being as stupid and mindless as the invasion of Iraq to get all those "mobile chemical labs".

The infamous Dem. quotes PROVE who was beating the drums for action against Saddam for the previous decade...Bush finally had the balls to actually stop whining about him and act....with the approval of Congress, that incidentally could not have been done without Dem. votes....
and can the bullshit about what "Bush would have done in Syria" or who would be supporting what....thats crap and you know it, pure conjecture.


What pisses me off the most is that in pointing the rights hypocrisy I get lumped in with the likes of Desh who supports the massacre of innocent bystanders because this time it is HER son of bitch that is in charge and not the right's. I hate this president, not the virulent right wing fox news fed hate, but the hate of someone that voted for him the first time because he said he was going to undue what Bush did and then proceeded to serve out two more Bush terms on war and foreign policy.

Those of you on the right would find something wrong with President Obama if he stopped the rape of a child. Under his watch Bin Laden was killed and the right said so what. If Bush had gotten Bin Laden you fucktards would still be talking about it. Partisan politics has ruined this country. Few on either side give two shits if something is good for the country. If the guy you hate supports it, yer agin it.

More bullshit opinion..but that your right...why don't you just accuse the right of racism concerning Obama...thats the card pinheads always play.

Differences in political opinions are as unavoidable as, to a certain point, they may perhaps be necessary; but it is exceedingly to be regretted that subjects cannot be discussed with temper on the one hand, or decisions submitted or decisions submitted to without having the motives, which led to them, improperly implicated on the other; and this regret borders on chagrin when we find that men of abilities, zealous patriots, having the same general objects in view, and the same upright intentions to prosecute them, will not exercise more charity in deciding on the opinions and actions of one another.

GEORGE WASHINGTON, letter to Alexander Hamilton, Aug. 26, 1792

but it is exceedingly to be regretted that subjects cannot be discussed with temper on the one hand,

Right....look in the mirror lad....its you accusing me unjustly at the onset that is the crux of this....I am not 'the right'...I am not 'the left'....I speak for myself and extrapolating
what I post to what you think I mean is wrong.

 

[monty1]

No, she isn't. I've corrected you on this point several times, most recently last night. I haven't the foggiest idea why you continue to lie about it.

And it was unreasonable to expect that the UN investigation team would assign blame for the August 21 attack considering it is not within the scope of its mandate to do so.

The bottom line is that there will be no independent arbiter of whom is responsible for the August 21 attack, ever.

Have you somehow misread the statement from Del Ponte? Did you miss the fact that she still remains of the opinion that the terrorists used the chemical weapons? Bring the article back and quote it here if you are still confused.

 

[Bonestorm]

Also, monty, I like what portion of that Foreign Policy pieve you chose to highlight (underlined) and what you omitted (bold):

U.N. inspectors have collected a "wealth" of evidence on the use of nerve agents that points to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against his own people, according to a senior Western official.

The inspection team, which is expected on Monday to present U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon with a highly anticipated report on a suspected Aug. 21 nerve agent attack in the suburbs of Damascus, will not directly accuse the Syrian regime of gassing its own people, according to three U.N.-based diplomats familiar with the investigation. But it will provide a strong circumstantial case -- based on an examination of spent rocket casings, ammunition, and laboratory tests of soil, blood, and urine samples -- that points strongly in the direction of Syrian government culpability.

"I know they have gotten very rich samples -- biomedical and environmental -- and they have interviewed victims, doctors and nurses," said the Western official. "It seems they are very happy with the wealth of evidence they got." The official, who declined to speak on the record because of the secrecy surrounding the U.N. investigation, could not identify the specific agents detected by the inspector team, but said, "You can conclude from the type of evidence the [identity of the] author."

 

[Bonestorm]

Have you somehow misread the statement from Del Ponte? Did you miss the fact that she still remains of the opinion that the terrorists used the chemical weapons? Bring the article back and quote it here if you are still confused.

Yeah, what's the date of her statements and what did the commission of which she is a member later conclude?

 

[blackascoal]

I am aware of all of this. I have never thought you supported war regardless of who was in charge. As for the spontaneous generation of antiwar libertarians in the Republican party? They wouldn't would be there if Obama were not president. It is a pacifism of convenience.

Thank you .. but I'm not so sure about your thought that libertarians wouldn't be there if Obama wasn't.

Somewhere on this board .. before Obama even ran for the WH, there is an article I posted that spoke of the coming libertarian crash into the Republican Party. It's the only way republicans can reach the youth vote.

BECAUSE of Obama's failure to address the issues of youth and students, there is now a surge of young former Obama voters turning to libertarianism.

 

[monty1]

Listen to Del Ponte's words and read the short message posted below the video.

No matter how the US wants to counterspin this issue now, the preponderance of evidence remains that the chemical weapons were more likely used by the terrorists.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22425058

The latest report that is still to come from the UN does not change this.

 

[Bonestorm]

Listen to Del Ponte's words and read the short message posted below the video.

No matter how the US wants to counterspin this issue now, the preponderance of evidence remains that the chemical weapons were more likely used by the terrorists.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22425058

The latest report that is still to come from the UN does not change this.

Del Ponte made those statements on May 6, 2013. Here is what the report of the COmmission of which she is a member concluded on July 18, 2013, a month and a half later:

Anti-government armed groups could gain access to and use chemical weapons. This includes nerve agents, though there is no compelling evidence that these groups possess such weapons or their requisite delivery systems.

Cut the bullshit, monty.

 

[Phantasmal]

but it is exceedingly to be regretted that subjects cannot be discussed with temper on the one hand,

Right....look in the mirror lad....its you accusing me unjustly at the onset that is the crux of this....I am not 'the right'...I am not 'the left'....I speak for myself and extrapolating
what I post to what you think I mean is wrong.

Your post is funny coming from Mr Vanilla Assumption himself.

 

[Annie]

I'm sorry, 'hero worship' is bullshit.

There is no worship of anything going on other than the worship of the US is not mass-murdering people again.

Many of those using the 'hero worship' meme claimed the same thing when Obama was bombing Libya back into the Stone Age, and claimed those against that horror were 'worshiping Gaddafi like a hero.'

That's bullshit.

There are no heroes in this, not Putin, not Obama, Not Assad, not Kerry. This isn't about heroes, it's about failed US foreign policy.

and that was very WELL SAID.

Many of us in agreement about Putin 'saving the day' do not agree with each other on most topics. You would more often find yourself with Rana, me with others on the right. However, sensible folks know when to come together and work together. That may mean making compromises or just not being asses. I wish the Washington critters could do the same.

 

[anatta]

I'm sorry, 'hero worship' is bullshit.

There is no worship of anything going on other than the worship of the US is not mass-murdering people again.

Many of those using the 'hero worship' meme claimed the same thing when Obama was bombing Libya back into the Stone Age, and claimed those against that horror were 'worshiping Gaddafi like a hero.'

That's bullshit.

There are no heroes in this, not Putin, not Obama, Not Assad, not Kerry. This isn't about heroes, it's about failed US foreign policy.

disagree to the extent there are those whom would rather "dis" Obama/US just for the hell of it -for the "dynamic Putin".

Not to put too bright a light on it - it's a smallish point. Couldn't agree with you more on the rest of the post though -well said!

 

[Annie]

Thank you .. but I'm not so sure about your thought that libertarians wouldn't be there if Obama wasn't.

Somewhere on this board .. before Obama even ran for the WH, there is an article I posted that spoke of the coming libertarian crash into the Republican Party. It's the only way republicans can reach the youth vote.

BECAUSE of Obama's failure to address the issues of youth and students, there is now a surge of young former Obama voters turning to libertarianism.

and not just the young. Bottom line, whatever the reason the Iraq 'rebuilding' failed big time. Some people actually learned from that. What so many of the Desh type of liberals never recognized, Bush was severely criticized from the right throughout most of his second term. Some were on his domestic choices, more was on spending. That the 'left' never heard that, is part of the problem with their not understanding what is happening today.

 

[monty1]

Yeah, what's the date of her statements and what did the commission of which she is a member later conclude?

About all that remains important now to the world is that the UN is not going to give the US the evidence it requires in order to counterspin the efforts Putin has made with the Assad regime. You and less than a majority of Americans can think it will but that's of minor importance.

Not of minor importance when it comes to the question of whether the US will go ahead with it's war, because I'm fairly certain it will regardless of the lack of solid evidence. Just that the US won't be able to do it with credibility in the eyes of the world. That's what's most important regardless of the US attitude that America doesn't care what the world thinks.

Putin has won the day as far as the propaganda war goes. Already the attempt to make it look like it was Kerry's initiative has been shelved. Can we expect a move to unshelve it at a later date? "That" would be an indication of a US defeatist position evolving.

 

[Annie]

disagree to the extent there are those whom would rather "dis" Obama/US just for the hell of it -for the "dynamic Putin".

Not to put too bright a light on it - it's a smallish point. Couldn't agree with you more on the rest of the post though -well said!

I'm not saying there aren't any people just hating on Obama, I just don't converse with those folks. I distance myself from idiots whatever side.

 

[Bonestorm]

About all that remains important now to the world is that the UN is not going to give the US the evidence it requires in order to counterspin the efforts Putin has made with the Assad regime. You and less than a majority of Americans can think it will but that's of minor importance.

Not of minor importance when it comes to the question of whether the US will go ahead with it's war, because I'm fairly certain it will regardless of the lack of solid evidence. Just that the US won't be able to do it with credibility in the eyes of the world. That's what's most important regardless of the US attitude that America doesn't care what the world thinks.

Putin has won the day as far as the propaganda war goes. Already the attempt to make it look like it was Kerry's initiative has been shelved. Can we expect a move to unshelve it at a later date? "That" would be an indication of a US defeatist position evolving.

SO I take it you're not going to trot out Del Ponte again? Thanks.

 

[blackascoal]

and that was very WELL SAID.

Many of us in agreement about Putin 'saving the day' do not agree with each other on most topics. You would more often find yourself with Rana, me with others on the right. However, sensible folks know when to come together and work together. That may mean making compromises or just not being asses. I wish the Washington critters could do the same.

Isn't that how coalition is supposed to work? If we only seek to build coalitions with people we agree with on everything, what kind of a 'coalition' is that .. other than a doomed to be ineffective one?

Where we may fight like cats on one issue, we may stand together like the 300 Spartans on another. That's called politics.

Where I may applaud Putin on one issue, I may call him a monster on another. That's called discernment.

Nowhere is that need for discernment to be found more than in the legacy of George Bush.

Was he an evil man? Sometimes.

Was he a saint? Sometimes.

Intelligent discernment requires honesty. Are you guided by facts, or emotion?

 

[monty1]

SO I take it you're not going to trot out Del Ponte again? Thanks.

I'm going to continue to trot out Del Ponte as long as she is the person who has the most important evidence to offer. And as long as she doesn't recant and declare the opposite of her position so far.

And I'm going to trot out the UN report that is coming that won't give your country the condemnation of Assad's regime that is necessary to save face for war.

And in fact, I think that my comments have as much truthful substance as anyone's on this issue. I think most Americans are now fighting an internal battle with themselves in order to reconcile their patriotism with the facts on the ground.

And the mere fact that Putin is responsible for putting this war on hold at least is especially discomforting. Anyone who listened to Lawrence MacDonald last night on MSNBC could not have been amused by the 'hate' Putin rhetoric. It was quite disgusting really. I wonder how Fox News portrayed the whole thing?

 

[blackascoal]

and not just the young. Bottom line, whatever the reason the Iraq 'rebuilding' failed big time. Some people actually learned from that. What so many of the Desh type of liberals never recognized, Bush was severely criticized from the right throughout most of his second term. Some were on his domestic choices, more was on spending. That the 'left' never heard that, is part of the problem with their not understanding what is happening today.

If you listen closely, you can hear the sad songs of the growing ranks of disaffected democrats. Disaffected and rejected by Obama.

I listen to those songs because I'm a Green .. trolling for lost souls. :0)

Truth is, Obama has been very good for the growth of independents.