Why guys? Why do Neocons and people like Bolton, Haley, etc. want nuclear war?

[Jorge Luis Borges]

What's long term?

We've been up in there for a bit now.

This is typical creep imo

True, we've been there a while, but we haven't gone full nation building or committed to winning the war for any particular side. Those are the real things to avoid imo. If we become committed to defeating one side for the gas attacks, I think we're in too deep.

I can certainly understand why someone would think this is a slippery slope toward being involved in a war that is no win for us. I just don't see any slippery slope toward nuclear war at this point.

 

[trident]

True, we've been there a while, but we haven't gone full nation building or committed to winning the war for any particular side. Those are the real things to avoid imo. If we become committed to defeating one side for the gas attacks, I think we're in too deep.

I can certainly understand why someone would think this is a slippery slope toward being involved in a war that is no win for us. I just don't see any slippery slope toward nuclear war at this point.

I agree with your last sentence.

Kind of forgot that was the point of this thread.

-----

TBH it's the small wars/ even smaller ops that are worrying me now. And the joint interventions.

The sands are shifting. A country can be brought down with a lot less than an Iraq invasion and it seems like Cold War redux with new spices.

Syria is more complicated in and of itself but it's part of larger and longer destabilization effort in the region.

I just have a hard time buying the any of this but I can't tell you what is actiallly going on

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

what's a neocon?

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

I agree with your last sentence.

Kind of forgot that was the point of this thread.

-----

TBH it's the small wars/ even smaller ops that are worrying me now. And the joint interventions.

The sands are shifting. A country can be brought down with a lot less than an Iraq invasion and it seems like Cold War redux with new spices.

Syria is more complicated in and of itself but it's part of larger and longer destabilization effort in the region.

I just have a hard time buying the any of this but I can't tell you what is actiallly going on

I agree. I'd have little problem at all with ending almost all of our current military interventions. (I only add the caveat "almost" because I'm not confident I know what all our foreign military commitments are currently).

I think it's even more true given how divided the US is domestically. It has become too hard to maintain a unite front externally and thus weakens us abroad. So a hyperactive foreign policy is the worst thing right now.

 

[trident]

I agree. I'd have little problem at all with ending almost all of our current military interventions. (I only add the caveat "almost" because I'm not confident I know what all our foreign military commitments are currently).

I think it's even more true given how divided the US is domestically. It has become too hard to maintain a unite front externally and thus weakens us abroad. So a hyperactive foreign policy is the worst thing right now.

Word

 

[UPAZWITTS]

Assad is a habitual line stepper and Charlie Murphy is in office.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Word