« First « Previous Comments 36 - 45 of 45 Search these comments
rdm saysLet's fuck over the Kurds...again. sickening
Does supporting the kurds require troops on the ground in Syria?
Goran_K saysrdm saysLet's fuck over the Kurds...again. sickening
Does supporting the kurds require troops on the ground in Syria?
Yeah I don't get the connection here either. This is unrelated to Kurds. Just let Assad be he is certainly no angel neither was Saddam but both are/were the best men their region has/had to offer at the time. Don't repeat the Iraq quagmire.
There is no chance Russia will be in there. I encourage China to intervene, be the best thing for us they could ever do.
TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce saysThere is no chance Russia will be in there. I encourage China to intervene, be the best thing for us they could ever do.
China is too smart to enter that shithole and waste their troops lives, the Russians learned their lesson long ago and won't be back either.
And if you think Trump will protect them from with airpower from a member of NATO whose dictator he loves, that isn't going to happen.
How is Libya doing? Pardon me if I'm dubious of pentagon brass and state department deep staters.
Afghanistan is more ridiculous than Syria, and there's never a reason given as to why we need to be there indefinitely and no exit plan. Let's just go
Goran_K saysEvan F. saysIt's not just the Dems who are upset about this move
Anyone against this is against logic.
False, how are you able to make a logical decision here? The truth is neither you nor I have the necessary facts on the ground to be able to claim it's logical. All we can claim is opinion.
My opinion is given Dunford, Mattis, McGurk, and allies reactions, the orange guy is probably wrong.
Goran_K saysNo this is simple logic.
Simple and simplistic are different things.
« First « Previous Comments 36 - 45 of 45 Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,364,988 comments by 15,738 users - Ceffer online now