Watch for the same thing or perhaps more against North Korea if Trump got as much of a jolly from this as it seems. Keep your eyes peeled on the news for the latter half of April starting on the 15th.
It would be a capital mistake to do something on the 15th. A lot of people will be *raw* about putting 'their money' in the government's hands.
Any flashy or exorbitant military outlay for about a month after that point is NOT going to play well.*
15th April is a major holiday in North Korea, on which they are fond of overt displays of military stuff. Such as a test detonation or volley o' ballistic missiles, among other explosives-based activities. It took Trump 2 1/2 days to respond to the chemical weapon attack in Syria. How fast a response is to anything done by North Korea depends on what they have on the drawing board.
Which prompts the question of how did the car bomber know to take him out? Either the Syrian air force has poor records security permitting aQ or the opposition to target him, they have a traitor in their midst, or they did it themselves...
I think the news is now reporting that the pilot who dropped the gas attack in Syria was killed by car bomb
So, who really ordered the attack in the first place, so that 45 could "rocket his way" to stardom...?
I don't think the calculus works out in his favor. He's got the news cycle off of his back for like.. a week. tops. If he was caught he'd be shot. Taking advantage of a situation doesn't mean that you caused it.
We do know that the Brits had plans to use chemical weapons in the event the Nazi's pulled off a successful amphibious landing on the British mainland. So in effect the standard for using banned weapons is:
The threat of annihilation by an enemy force, and that the banned weapons would have a major effect on the outcome of the battle/war. I'm not sure what the Nazis would have retaliated with in the case of the Brits using gas, but I assume they had limited supplies of chemical weapons.
It also changes the local populace from "i really would prefer my current government" to "charge the machine gun nest with a meat cleaver, because they're going to kill my family otherwise.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
! - mention that the public has very limited access to the information relevant to this event.I don't believe that this is true. 99% of the relevant information is public. You can't hide information on the scale of nations acting. You can lie about what it means.
Trump in particular can't, since his administration leaks like a sieve.
Besides, the up front and obvious explanation is good enough. Occam's Razor is serviceable here.
Trump has been saying throughout the campaign that he'd do this in this specific situation (I wouldn't have drawn the red line, but since it's been drawn, I'd try to enforce it - I paraphrase, but I think that's the gist of it). The situation came up and he bombed them like he insisted that Obama should have. Pretty straightforward.
It's also generally in line with his tough-guy persona and his often touted campaign goal of gaining respect through fear.
Finally it provides a fantastic distraction from the domestic political areas where he's struggled so far (taxes, health, ethics, management), which had been dominating the news before the strike, and a chance to refocus on the domestic political areas where he's done better (Court), which along with the strike seem to be dominating the news now.
So I don't see a need to add a theory of complex hidden motivations when the glaringly obvious ones seem sufficient.
Almost everyone in Europe said the same thing about the assassination of a certain Archduke in 1914, until "they" decided to make it neither a storm in a tea cup nor short-lived. (If for some reason you want more details, Barbara Tuchman has an excellent book on origins of WWI, and more recently, so does Holger H. Herwig.)Trying to draw comparisons with WW1 is a bit ridiculous....
The technology of war has moved on by soooo many levels that your comparison is like apples and oranges.
Fighting a guerilla war vs the west is one thing.... you reduce their technological advantage significantly (but even then you still end up losing)...
Anything more than that is just a farce...
Nuclear (aka ')(^$ hitting fan) conflicts are not instigated by events such as these.....
His point had nothing to do with technology.
|
To paraphrase: History is full of wars everyone knew would never happen.
In the bigger scheme of things.... a short lived storm in a tea cup.Almost everyone in Europe said the same thing about the assassination of a certain Archduke in 1914, until "they" decided to make it neither a storm in a tea cup nor short-lived. (If for some reason you want more details, Barbara Tuchman has an excellent book on origins of WWI, and more recently, so does Holger H. Herwig.)
Actually History is (kind of) full of wars that thankfully did not happen
Like the WWIII that just could have happened after Russia reacquired Crimea not so long ago
Or the one that could happen anytime the current Kim blasts a nuclear fart
And countless others that seemed bound to occur but that people managed to avoid and which usually promptly disappeared from our collective vision only to be replaced by the newest alarming news of doom
I believe we, as a species, managed to succesfully avoid far more devastating conflicts than we actually fought
Maybe it's a reason for some small hope
N.Korea might be crazy.... but they are no way near being that crazy!!!
IMO....the %^&*) will hit the fan, when one of the Arab states manages to get hold of a few small nukes and does the deed on Israel. One of the leaders will desperately want to be the one who destroys Israel and thus receive all the plaudits (and virgins in the afterlife... etc etc)
Israel absolutely will retaliate in brutal fashion, all the other Arab states will be forced to support their kin.... the US will have to get involved.... etc etc
The Mid East and religion will be the spark IMO... but not in this particular case.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That was my interpretation; well, the first line anyway. Would have posted earlier but I don't really want to get dragged into this thread.
That was my interpretation; well, the first line anyway. Would have posted earlier but I don't really want to get dragged into this thread.
Aye.
And here we are!
Popcorn?
Aye.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To paraphrase: History is full of wars everyone knew would never happen.
In the bigger scheme of things.... a short lived storm in a tea cup.Almost everyone in Europe said the same thing about the assassination of a certain Archduke in 1914, until "they" decided to make it neither a storm in a tea cup nor short-lived. (If for some reason you want more details, Barbara Tuchman has an excellent book on origins of WWI, and more recently, so does Holger H. Herwig.)
Actually History is (kind of) full of wars that thankfully did not happen
Like the WWIII that just could have happened after Russia reacquired Crimea not so long ago
Or the one that could happen anytime the current Kim blasts a nuclear fart
And countless others that seemed bound to occur but that people managed to avoid and which usually promptly disappeared from our collective vision only to be replaced by the newest alarming news of doom
I believe we, as a species, managed to succesfully avoid far more devastating conflicts than we actually fought
Maybe it's a reason for some small hope
The Kellog Briand pact was hailed as the end of war. Surely, with such clear lines of alliance, no nation would dare attack another, knowing the cost would be so high.
Of course, it was anything but, causing what could have been a quarrel between two nations to become a massive war engulfing a continent.
Surely the horrors of the Great War had dulled any lust for another, and besides the treaty of Versailles had clearly spelled out the intentions of peace on the continent. Furthermore, the impositions upon the Germans would certainly assure they would pose no military threat for a century, and of course if they did make a fuss, then giving them a land grant from a neighboring country would assuage them...
The difference here is that with other wars, the horrors are visited upon others while you feel bad about it.
With world war III, the people that caused it will be the first targets.
None of the Arab states are that crazy either. Knowing they'll disappear in flash moments after they do it.
Mind you, some of the terrorist groups might be, especially since they're harder to target with ICBMs, but even their state sponsors don't want them getting their hands on nukes.
The thing is though, it doesnt even have to be a nuke to set Israel off.
In GW1 after the Scuds first hit Israel, it was later found out that Israel actually had birds in the sky heading for Baghdad, and it was only the begging of the US and the reassurance that they would go after them that kept Israel out of the war. Sadaam knew that if Israel jumped in, all bets would be off. The entire Arab coallition would be forced to unite against Israel.
Imagine a few Sarin or VX rockets in Tel Aviv??
The big advantage that terrorists always have is that they only have to succeed once and its game on.... anti-terror orgs have got to be on guard 24/7
And I really wouldnt rule out some Arab terror cell getting hold of a mini-nuke from someone
As someone once said...."If you knock on enough doors, eventually one opens."
If a cell get hold of one and set it off in Tel Aviv.... who would the Israelis know who to blame?
The difference here is that with other wars, the horrors are visited upon others while you feel bad about it.
With world war III, the people that caused it will be the first targets.
Not really. You don't think that Trump, or May, or Putin, would be whisked away to some radiation-proof hole in the ground at the first sign of trouble, so he/she could watch the fireworks in complete safety?
It's the rest of the population of Washington, DC Florida that would suffer. In that regard, it's no different than Field Marshall Montgomery sending I Airborne "a bridge too far" into the Netherlands. He was in complete safety....
Really, consider Israel's history with the arab world. Everyone hates them, on principle if not actively. What they probably did was set up plans to nuke every major arab city if something happens to them. That way, all the arab nations have a vested interest in not letting stuff happen to risk this scenario. Further, Israel wouldn't even have to threaten anyone with this. It is the logical answer to "so, what do we think Israel will do with their nuclear arsenal?"
But thats the prob with the Arab vs Israel thing...
Its not just the Arab govt's that are the worry..... there are several very well financed independent terror cells backed by wealthy individuals... look where Al Quaeda have their roots?
The Saudis are notorious for shaking hands and smiling with the west but financing the terrorists in the background.
Like I said it really wouldnt have to be anything massive to set the spark...... money, a few decent chemists and a dollop of religion.... BOOOOOOMMMM!!!!
Again, take out Israel, and everyone dies. That is the likely scenario. Said wealthy individuals will not likely enjoy the result if the above happens. Gives them the task of preventing it.
The Saudis are notorious for shaking hands and smiling with the west but financing the terrorists in the background.
They don't really like EITHER group but you have to try to keep them happy or they'll explode you. One way or the other.
Again, take out Israel, and everyone dies. That is the likely scenario. Said wealthy individuals will not likely enjoy the result if the above happens. Gives them the task of preventing it.
Wealthy Individual: "Here you go my brothers, $50 million to take the fight to the evil west and to support our allies in Palestine. You must promise me one thing though.... don't do anything crazy against the Israelis."
Evil people: "Oh yes my prince (cackle) we promise (cackle) in Allah we trust. I feel him smiling on us both."
Simplified... but you get the point?!
Somehow I doubt orders are that kind of general. A simple "Go fight the Evil West. 50 megabucks will be waiting for you in America/wherever." would be enough to stave off the Israel risk.
Somehow I doubt orders are that kind of general. A simple "Go fight the Evil West. 50 megabucks will be waiting for you in America." would be enough to stave off the Israel risk.
.... because there's no possible way that either money or the resulting purchases could be moved?
I'm not following here. How does putting $50 million in a US repository keep one from blowing up Tel Aviv?
The issue is really an extension of "why don't the Evil men just take the 50 megabucks and run?" That kind of money is enough to stay pretty well hidden. The answer is of course that any terrorist sponsor would have to provide a limited budget repeatedly, receive reports regularly, and obtain corroboration. Just like everyone else financing any kind of major project.
FAEs double nicely as tac-nukes without the radiation...
Well, it appears that the recent bombing went so well that President Trump has decided to have another, only this time in Afghanistan. o_O
...Somehow, it doesn't surprise me that the current administration would aim to use the biggest explosive it could. Was there any actual tactical or strategic reason for using that kind of thing?
...Somehow, it doesn't surprise me that the current administration would aim to use the biggest explosive it could. Was there any actual tactical or strategic reason for using that kind of thing?
I'd assume so; I don't think senior military leaders are going to start dropping bombs solely to please the president. :P
Still, in my opinion this represents a substantial escalation. As a parent of three teenagers, I'm particularly worried about the direction in which the world seems to be heading.
Trumps popularity has ticked somewhat upward thanks to these actions, at least according to some polls we were talking about at lunch. So he might be flexing USA military might to distract from other issues.
We'll see how well this works once the next round of legislation comes through.
Afghanistan cave complex ate a MoaB. Not much else short of dropping a tac nuke in the cave's gullet is going to crack that particular egg open.
I think the Guardian, yesterday or perhaps today, posted a story that claimed the FBI has tangible evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and agents of the Russian government, and it could lead to...
Ohhhh look at the big beautiful bomb
A version of "SQUIRREL?!" from Up, eh? ....
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A version of "SQUIRREL?!" from Up, eh? ....I think the Guardian, yesterday or perhaps today, posted a story that claimed the FBI has tangible evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and agents of the Russian government, and it could lead to...
Ohhhh look at the big beautiful bomb
The american public isn't THA...
you know what i can't finish that sentence. I'm done with my species.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the Guardian, yesterday or perhaps today, posted a story that claimed the FBI has tangible evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and agents of the Russian government, and it could lead to...
Ohhhh look at the big beautiful bomb
I hope I'm wrong, but we seem increasingly unlikely to cast off Trump, irrespective of what he's guilty of. The unthinkable is becoming the new normal, and by the time most people realize that the U.S.A's very own "dear leader" has cemented control, it will be too late to do anything...and frankly, I doubt many of them will really care anyway, as long as the Superbowl isn't delayed and the beer prices at Circle K don't go too high.
When we lose our ability to be shocked, we cease to react to things that should be shocking, and instead pay attention to the trivial. Hey, does this pot feel warm to you? OH WAIT WHO CARES LOOK AT WHAT KHLOE KARDASHIAN DID!
you know what i can't finish that sentence. I'm done with my species.
Wrong. You're only done with your species when they've nuked you into oblivion.
Shouldn't be long now. ;-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It'll be hard to get the Republican base to turn on him and some of them never will, but that doesn't mean he's in good shape. His popularity is low, despite a small war bounce. The various special elections since November show a consistent incredible Democratic bounce - small signs, but indicators that have to be worrying Republican pols.
He's not really cementing control - he's not staffing agencies, his own staff seems to be mostly warring with each other for the king's ear. The GOP is proving incapable of working even with each other to accomplish anything.
There is Resistance and it seems to be doing the job.
They're going to do a lot of damage, but this crew doesn't seem competent enough to actually pull off the coup. That very incompetence will do a lot of the damage, but also keep them from doing worse.
I sure hope you're right, but I have grave doubts. Hardly a day goes by without revelations that would have toppled other administrations, and yet nothing happens. It doesn't seem to be much of a stretch to imagine that Trump could start consolidating power and the shell-shocked populace, having grown numb to his unending string of fiascos, would simply fail to react at all. Especially if he manages to start a war.
|
I don't know, folks said the same thing about "W". Don't get me wrong, things were certainly not great then, but we got out of it alive. It's hardly time to start building doomsday shelters over this calamity. I think folks should think long and hard whether they lean right or left and decide if this is really how we want to proceed. There is a way out, or we can keep digging the hole; Though we will live through it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know, folks said the same thing about "W". Don't get me wrong, things were certainly not great then, but we got out of it alive.
.... except for the people who, literally, didn't. For some people -- more than 4,000 US service personnel, more than one million Iraqis -- things were not only "not great," but they were about as bad as it's possible to get.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know, folks said the same thing about "W". Don't get me wrong, things were certainly not great then, but we got out of it alive. It's hardly time to start building doomsday shelters over this calamity. I think folks should think long and hard whether they lean right or left and decide if this is really how we want to proceed. There is a way out, or we can keep digging the hole; Though we will live through it.I know. Seems like every Republican President we get, we think "They've scraped the bottom of the barrel and elected a complete incompetent." And then the next one is worse. I shudder to think what the next Republican president will be like.
We get Pence. Who besides being a fan of Conversion Therapy(using electroshock to try to make LGBT people go straight) Is a Dominist who wants to get the rapture/apocolypse going.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How is Pence better than Trump?