The War With ISIS/ISIL

Rambo

The Trollest Of Trolls
Moderator
Messages
27,514
Ratings
13,709
http://www.thenation.com/article/181601/whos-paying-pro-war-pundits

Who’s Paying the Pro-War Pundits?
Talking heads like former General Jack Keane are all over the news media fanning fears of ISIS. Shouldn’t the public know about their links to Pentagon contractors?

Lee Fang
September 12, 2014

Retired General Anthony Zinni, retired General Jack Keane and former Bush administration official Fran Townsend

If you read enough news and watch enough cable television about the threat of the Islamic State, the radical Sunni Muslim militia group better known simply as ISIS, you will inevitably encounter a parade of retired generals demanding an increased US military presence in the region. They will say that our government should deploy, as retired General Anthony Zinni demanded, up to 10,000 American boots on the ground to battle ISIS. Or as in retired General Jack Keane’s case, they will make more vague demands, such as for “offensive” air strikes and the deployment of more military advisers to the region.

But what you won’t learn from media coverage of ISIS is that many of these former Pentagon officials have skin in the game as paid directors and advisers to some of the largest military contractors in the world. Ramping up America’s military presence in Iraq and directly entering the war in Syria, along with greater military spending more broadly, is a debatable solution to a complex political and sectarian conflict. But those goals do unquestionably benefit one player in this saga: America’s defense industry.

Keane is a great example of this phenomenon. His think tank, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), which he oversees along with neoconservative partisans Liz Cheney and William Kristol, has provided the data on ISIS used for multiple stories by The New York Times, the BBC and other leading outlets.


Jack Keane (Screenshot: Fox News)

Keane has appeared on Fox News at least nine times over the last two months to promote the idea that the best way to stop ISIS is through military action—in particular, through air strikes deep into ISIS-held territory. In one of the only congressional hearings about ISIS over the summer, Keane was there to testify and call for more American military engagement. On Wednesday evening, Keane declared President Obama’s speech on defeating ISIS insufficient, arguing that a bolder strategy is necessary. “I truly believe we need to put special operation forces in there,” he told host Megyn Kelly.

Left unsaid during his media appearances (and left unmentioned on his congressional witness disclosure form) are Keane’s other gigs: as special adviser to Academi, the contractor formerly known as Blackwater; as a board member to tank and aircraft manufacturer General Dynamics; a “venture partner” to SCP Partners, an investment firm that partners with defense contractors, including XVionics, an “operations management decision support system” company used in Air Force drone training; and as president of his own consulting firm, GSI LLC.

To portray Keane as simply a think tank leader and a former military official, as the media have done, obscures a fairly lucrative career in the contracting world. For the General Dynamics role alone, Keane has been paid a six-figure salary in cash and stock options since he joined the firm in 2004; last year, General Dynamics paid him $258,006.

Keane did not immediately return a call requesting comment for this article.

Disclosure would also help the public weigh Keane’s policy advocacy. For instance, in his August 24 opinion column for The Wall Street Journal, in which he was bylined only as a retired general and the chairman of ISW, Keane wrote that “the time has come to confront the government of Qatar, which funds and arms ISIS and other Islamist terrorist groups such as Hamas.” While media reports have linked fundraisers for ISIS with individuals operating in Qatar (though not the government), the same could be said about Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, where many of the major donors of ISIS reportedly reside. Why did Keane single out Qatar and ignore Saudi Arabia and Kuwait? Is it because his company, Academi, has been a major business partner to the United Arab Emirates, Qatar’s primary rival in the region?

Other examples abound.


Anthony Zinni (Screenshot: Charlie Rose)

In a Washington Post story about Obama’s decision not to deploy troops to combat ISIS, retired Marine General James Mattis was quoted as a skeptic. “The American people will once again see us in a war that doesn’t seem to be making progress,” Mattis told the paper. Left unmentioned was Mattis’s new role as Keane’s colleague on the General Dynamics corporate board, a role that afforded Mattis $88,479 in cash and stock options in 2013.

Retired General Anthony Zinni, perhaps the loudest advocate of a large deployment of American soliders into the region to fight ISIS, is a board member to BAE Systems’ US subsidiary, and also works for several military-focused private equity firms.

CNN pundit Frances Townsend, a former Bush administration official, has recently appeared on television calling for more military engagement against ISIS. As the Public Accountability Initiative, a nonprofit that studies elite power structures, reported, Townsend “holds positions in two investment firms with defense company holdings, MacAndrews & Forbes and Monument Capital Group, and serves as an advisor to defense contractor Decision Sciences.”




Fran Townsend (Screenshot: CSPAN)

“Mainstream news outlets have a polite practice of identifying former generals and former congressmembers as simply ‘formers’—neglecting to inform the public of what these individuals are doing now, which is often quite pertinent information, like that they are corporate lobbyists or board members,” says Jeff Cohen, an associate professor of journalism at Ithaca College.

Media outlets might justify their omissions by reasoning that these pundits have merely advocated certain military strategies, not specific weapons systems, so disclosure of their financial stake in the policy need not be made. Yet the drumbeat for war has already spiraled into calls for increased military spending that lifts all boats—or non-operational jets for that matter.

When the Pentagon sent a recent $2 billion request for ramped-up operations in the Middle East, supposedly to confront the ISIS issue, budget details obtained by Bloomberg News revealed that officials asked for money for additional F-35 planes. The F-35 is not in operation and would not be used against ISIS. The plane is notoriously over budget and perpetually delayed—some experts call it the most expensive weapon system in human history—with a price tag now projected to be over $1 trillion. In July, an engine fire grounded the F-35 fleet and again delayed the planned debut of the plane. How it ended up in the Pentagon’s Middle East wish list is unclear.

“I think an inclination to use military action a lot is something the defense industry subscribes to because it helps to perpetuate an overall climate of permissiveness towards military spending,” says Ed Wasserman, dean of the UC Berkeley Graduate School for Journalism. Wasserman says that the media debate around ISIS has tilted towards more hawkish former military leaders, and that the public would be best served not only with better disclosure but also a more balanced set of opinions that would include how expanded air strikes could cause collateral civil casualties. ”The past fifty years has a lot of evidence of the ineffectiveness of air power when it comes to dealing with a more nimble guerrilla-type adversary, and I’m not hearing this conversation,” he notes.

The pro-war punditry of retired generals has been the subject of controversy in the past. In a much-cited 2008 exposé, The New York Times revealed a network of retired generals on the payroll of defense contractors who carefully echoed the Bush administration’s Iraq war demands through appearances on cable television. 



The paper’s coverage of the run-up to a renewed conflict in the region today has been notably measured, including many voices skeptical of calls for a more muscular military response to ISIS. Nonetheless, the Times has relied on research from a contractor-funded advocacy organization as part of its ISIS coverage. Reports produced by Keane’s ISW have been used to support six different infographics used for Times stories since June. The Times has not mentioned Keane’s potential conflict of interest or that ISW may have a vested stake in its policy positions. The Public Accountability Initiative notes that ISW’s corporate sponsors represent “a who’s who of the defense industry and includes Raytheon, SAIC, Palantir, General Dynamics, CACI, Northrop Grumman, DynCorp, and L-3 Communication.” As the business network CNBC reported this week, Raytheon in particular has much to gain from escalation in Iraq, as the company produces many of the missiles and radar equipment used in airstrikes.

In addition to providing reports and quotes for the media, ISW leaders have demanded a greater reaction to ISIS from the Obama administration. In The Weekly Standard this week, ISW president Kim Kagan wrote that President Obama’s call for a limited engagement against ISIS “has no chance of success.” 



ISW’s willingness to push the envelope has gotten the organization into hot water before. In 2013, ISW suffered an embarrassing spectacle when one of its analysts, Elizabeth O’Bagy, was found to have inflated her academic credentials, touting a PhD from a Georgetown program that she had never entered.


But memories are short, and the media outlets now relying heavily on ISW research have done little to scrutinize the think tank’s policy goals. Over the last two years, ISW, including O’Bagy, were forcefully leading the push to equip Syrian rebels with advanced anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry to defeat Bashar al-Assad.

For Keane, providing arms to Syrian rebels, even anti-American groups, was a worthwhile gamble. In an interview with Fox Business Network in May of last year, Keane acknowledged that arming Syrian rebels might mean “weapons can fall into radical Islamists’ hands.” He continued, “It is true the radical Islamists have gained in power and influence mainly because we haven’t been involved and that is a fact, but it’s still true we have vetted some of these moderate rebel groups with the CIA, and I’m convinced we can—it’s still acceptable to take that risk, and let’s get on with changing momentum in the war.” 

That acceptable risk Keane outlined has come to fruition. Recent reports now indicate that US-made weapons sent from American allies in the region to Syrian rebels have fallen into the hands of ISIS.

Keane, and ISW, is undeterred. The group just put out a call for 25,000 ground troops in Iraq and Syria.
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
6,440
Ratings
1,909
She doesn't look too bad for someone who is 52. Why don't I remember her? Oh - she wasn't ever secretary.

Why pray tell would we take advice from a bunch of people who wanted to topple Saddam Hussein breeding and sowing all the current problems in the Middle East and in part North Africa? I leave Palestine out of it because it's been hopeless and dire since Jesus was a young boy.

Iraq was equipped was it not? Isn't ISIS using the equipment now?
 

doghouse

King Of The Elite Idiots
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
9,615
Ratings
9,278
Why pray tell would we take advice from a bunch of people who wanted to topple Saddam Hussein breeding and sowing all the current problems in the Middle East and in part North Africa?
Firstly, we shouldn't take advice from those assbags. But secondly, the current problems predate them by a century.
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
What would we expect from any talking head who appears on mainstream media? Whether or not they have ties to partisan think tanks or military contractors is moot. You could dig up the same opinions from non-conflicted experts.
 

Russell Street

King Of The Trolls
Supporter
Messages
6,461
Ratings
3,623
This does explain the preoccupation with all the James Bond high-tech crap that doesn't really work so good, when every JROTC cadet knows that you need an infantry to hold ground.
Soldiers and rifles aren't as profitable as complex and expendable drones and the like.
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
I think deep in the bowels of the military there is a faction that believes in the complete remote control war. They want a skirmish to test their methodology and advance their credibility.
 

Russell Street

King Of The Trolls
Supporter
Messages
6,461
Ratings
3,623
I think deep in the bowels of the military there is a faction that believes in the complete remote control war. They want a skirmish to test their methodology and advance their credibility.
I guess I'm not a sci-fi geek so I have no faith or interest in such a thing,
 

John Lee Pettimore III

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
1,290
Ratings
1,314
What would we expect from any talking head who appears on mainstream media? Whether or not they have ties to partisan think tanks or military contractors is moot. You could dig up the same opinions from non-conflicted experts.
Sounds analogous to the "Al Gore only cares about global warming to line his own pockets" nonsense.
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
Dumbfuck Canadian Jihadist. Of course he was radicalized when he went to Uni in California. Can back a nut bar Muslim.

Interesting that they are trying to recruit Canadians with references to things near and dear to our hearts: hockey and going to the cottage. I even thought about joining up for a second.

Slick production values. Two cameras.

 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
I can't fucking stand these god damn radicalized sunnis motherfuckers. I take Radicalized Shias over these fuckers, lesser of two evils. Shias at least attacked legit military targets. These fuckers aim to kill everybody, they are no religious zealous, just a bunch of Nihilists killing people for the sake of killing under the banner of religion. I wish they would fuck with the Russians, Russians don't stand for that kind of shit.

If anyone wants to read some interesting books about this kind of topic please do read See no Evil, sleeping with the devil, and the devil we know. I couldn't put them down.
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
I will say I love the way his khaki bandoleer coherently blends with the lovely brown of his dress, mumu, nightgown kaftan.
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
6,440
Ratings
1,909
Oh this was the one. I don't want to risk watching these otherwise I get flagged as someone who'll get thrown in jail for conspiring. At any rate, are people actually motivated by YouTube videos to go fly half way across the globe and start fighting as an insurgent? Most of the ones in Canada, so far, have all the pedigree of being an introverted loser and have neither women nor a pay cheque.

Before people start glorifying the Kurds as the next messianic race, they ought to search fgm and Kurds.
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
I think these people have issues of how they fit into society. I can't imagine that YouTube videos are the key recruiting tool. This clown fighting for ISIS is ridiculous but no more ridiculous than the Canadian woman (amongst others), kicked out of the Israeli army going to fight for the Kurds
 

Russell Street

King Of The Trolls
Supporter
Messages
6,461
Ratings
3,623
At any rate, are people actually motivated by YouTube videos to go fly half way across the globe and start fighting as an insurgent?
Yes. Socially detached loners with no sense of purpose or belonging can easily be swayed by a decently produced propaganda video online. Is it that different from the instant igent phenomena where people suddenly start dropping outrageous amounts on clothing after stumbling upon a style bulletin board?
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
6,440
Ratings
1,909
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30596474

For a rag tag militia, how the bloody hell do they shoot down a jet fighter plane?

Yes. Socially detached loners with no sense of purpose or belonging can easily be swayed by a decently produced propaganda video online. Is it that different from the instant igent phenomena where people suddenly start dropping outrageous amounts on clothing after stumbling upon a style bulletin board?
There was some other video about these Yazidis women who are being auctioned at a slave market - I forget which one but it showed the men giddy waiting to get their hands on them - something along the lines of "I'm going to get me a yazidi". So I guess it's no better than the loner who nurses a bottle of Coors Light for hours on end at a strip club staring and not buying any dances.
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
6,440
Ratings
1,909
Joe Canada up there in the Youtube knows how to go over to the Middle East and shoot a missile? Are the buttons not in Cyrillic? A helicopter I can imagine indiscriminately firing into the air will take it down but okay, I just find it improbable.

Maybe we should return to sending drones to terrorize them.
 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
I have never agreed with drones, it does not send the right signals. Let me explain myself, a drone would never inspire as much fear as an assassin that is able to kill you in your sleep, able to sneak in and out without a trace. A drone is an expensive apparatus that shows the lack of courage/willingness to bring war to the enemy's door. It makes the to be victims that those who use drones will never leave the safety of their house and is not willing to do the necessary sacrifices when the time comes. Anyone can push a button and send someone to hell, but not anyone can go shoulder to shoulder and slit the enemy's throat in front of their family, that is definition of fear, seen it coming and not being to do shit. Most of the time the last thing that a taliban feels is a boom and that's it. Those fuckers never ever get to beg for their life.
 

Russell Street

King Of The Trolls
Supporter
Messages
6,461
Ratings
3,623
Excellent point. At the moment, drones create an advantage (ignoring the backlash of bad PR every time they kill innocent civilians) but it is profoundly naive to believe that the capability will not spread very soon.
 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
Excellent point. At the moment, drones create an advantage (ignoring the backlash of bad PR every time they kill innocent civilians) but it is profoundly naive to believe that the capability will not spread very soon.
As far as I know for what is available to the public in the form of news articles, books, and other sources the way it works its through 'complex algorithms'(sort of like derivatives in the stock market) say you call someone from a remote place in pakistan to another hellhole and then to another from pre paid phones and so on it flags each one of them and then these algorithms start popping up 'objectives' here and there and that is what happens most of the time. The problem with this is most of those tribes and so on are poor fucking bastards that can pay a month every now and then so the use of mobile devices is very erratic at best hence why accidents like those tend to happen. If we had more people in the ground doing HUMINT running informers and so on would be the best for us because it would drop by a huge margin any sort of collateral damage done to those people. In my personal opinion whenever I hear a drone has killed '50 talibans' I take those sort of news very lightly, I don't trust them, too good to be true.
 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
I have no sympathy for people who are caught up in the net. You have some innocents that suffer, but it is better that some innocents suffer or die then the guilty walk free. The guilty are willing to engage in disproportionate responses, why should we not?
I agree with you, I did say something along those lines and I got some backlash from several users. I was just explaining how it works, that's all. The US relies way too much of their intelligence on computer algorithms and so on, a combination of both would be the best.
 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
The US has tried to isolate itself before and that got us World War II. After that we decided not to isolate ourselves, but to be on front lines. Better to attack first, than to be attacked and then respond to that attack. Even the flag on each soldier/marine has that. We are always attacking, never defending.
 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
We can argue about this all day and night long, but I suggest you to look for something released on December 13 1973 about oil and the middle east. Anything that affects to oil supplies is a matter of national security.
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
Then why the fuck is there a bipartisan foot dragging over the Excel Gateway pipeline. You want some conflict free oil America? Build the fucking pipeline.
 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
I mean, you're just proving my point. Why'd they start an embargo? Because they hate our freedom? No, because we were fucking around with supplying arms to Israel.
I don't think you actually look it up. On December 13 1973 a bunch of disaster planners released a 675 page document about how us (US OF A) could invade Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Emirates could be invaded with Airborne troops and so on, stabilize the country, puppet government and all of that could have been done in as little time as 6 weeks (I read it a long time ago, but I cannot recall). I'm not gonna touch the Israel topic, I will be flagged big time as a 'nazi.'
 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
I had assumed you meant the oil embargo. My mistake.

My point still stands. I don't know why we need a plan to invade countries we probably even shouldn't be recognizing as legal nations.
I will bite the bullet.

Israel as a country shouldn't exist. There was a conversation between Roosevelt and King Abdula onto which Rosevelt asked him (the king) for help with other arab countries to help with the creation of the state of Israel to which the king replied sorry, but I'm just paraphrasing for what I remember "Why should it be us the one to bother with them when it wasn't us who were killing them by the hundreds, if you want to give them land why don't you take it from Germany. It is an European problem, not a an Arab problem" Perhaps doing what Hitler originally wanted could have been better? Sending them over Madagascar, who knows. Palestinians and Jew have been living together on that forsaken land for as long as they have existed, but the moment we picked a side, just like it happened during the civil war in Beirut is when shit really got serious. This is the reason why the Marine Barracks and the French Barracks got truck bombed, we picked sides with the Maroonite Christians and the Israelis and that was the Lebanese and Iranian way of telling us to fuck off and deal with our shit and not get into their business.

We started that shit and we haven't been able to get it fix and we will never be able to do so because they hate Imperialism or any sort of Colonization. That's why we can't get our asses out of there and it will never happen.
 

Leitmotif

Eating his po boy w/oyster,petrosyan caviar,& gold
Messages
4,591
Ratings
2,710
So are you arguing that making rational arguments against radical islamists stops them from committing what most people consider terrorism? That seems to be the gist of the idea that giving into islamist demands - whether this is the antizionist movement, the allowance of self rule in european countries, or the adherence to radical laws in the middle east. Doesnt seem to work so well for anyone else - you don't see the islamists respecting the rights of any other society, why should they get the free pass to act like it is the dark ages? What country in the middle east is more then a dark age feifdom with modern technology? Isreal and Iran. How is any other nation anything other than a radical shithole that still follows laws set down by scum. Look at the torture cases against princes in the UAE, terrorism across the world by Al Quaeda, and racist outpouring across europe from islamists.
You're blaming a lot in a whole culture, when it shouldn't be like that. First you gotta learn to differentiate one from the other, not saying one is better than the other, but Sunni Islam has always been more prone to Violence than any other Islam sect. That is not say that Shia or Alawites are not violent, they are, but they tend to listen to their Imams or whatever far more better than the Sunnis do and its more complicated to them to start Jihad than the Sunnis, I won't get to this unless people want a proper explanation, but lets say anyone in Sunni Islam can declare Jihad, while Shias can only do that unless they have the blessing from a well versed imam or whatever (i forgot the actual name) in the Quoran on Islam Jurisprudence. I am not saying that we should give into, where did you read that we should do that? The problem has always been that we pick sides on places we shouldn't pick. Also, I don't give a fuck about Israel, Zionist, or any of that shit for that matter. It means shit to me what they do or don't. You ask about what country is in the dark age when it comes to modern technology, there is only one Saudi Arabia. Iran or Israel are not even close to that, chop chop square, wahabi islam, muslim brotherhood, amongst many other things tell me they are the most fucked up culture in the middle eastern world, censor of the internet, and I could keep on going. Al-Qaeda terrorism has always been a problem, but nowadays the group is not even a shadow of what it was, not even by miles, it got destroyed from the the very foundations of it, but we still gotta milk it. It all has been replaced by a bunch more of fucktards, ever seen an interrogation to one of the to be suicide bombers? I recommend you to do it, it will make you cry of laughter of the kind of people they actual recruit. About your question of Europe, its Europe own fault, they should have set a limit and stop being so damn politically correct about any sort of immigrants, no matter race or religion.

The anti Isreal bullshit you are posting Leitmotif is interesting. Interesting in that you seem to be taking JimmyRustlers statement and almost ignoring what he has said. The whole anti-zionist movement seems to be the new form of antisemitism. How is Isreal's claim to its land any less valid than that of the Saudis or the Palestinians? How do you define who land belongs to while ignoring international treaties? Why does land belong to someone other than who it is currently occupied by?
I never ignored jimmy,I was explaining myself, albeit not a good explanation probably on why we are there. I don't need to draw a damn picture to anyone. The problem has always been that we don't understand the culture, yet we have always been drawn into that region for a lot of motives. I hate to go into the whole history bullshit, but I can't stop myself to do it. The region itself hates any sort of foreign meddling, it has always been like that. Read about Alexander Burmes, he spoke the languages and got to know the territory pretty well, at the end he got killed, but his explanations on Pashtun tribes, Pakistani forgotten regions, and so on helps a lot understanding why they are the way they are, that stubbornness behind them. Why Israel lands are any less valid? Because the country of Israel never existed previously to World War II, the country itself was set up by a bunch of smart Europeans and Americans, we gave them everything they needed and hence why they had the most bad ass army in the Middle East, besides the Arab Legion. Israel as a land has existed, but not as a country. Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, and so on all came to exist because European meddling, at the end the borders were drawn not by the people who inhabit the land, but by Europeans hence why the region has always been on such tense position, and as it has been shown people there are highly xenophobic, read The Insurrection in Mesopotamia and you will understand a lot. Saudi Arabia was conquered by force and since we didn't care at first because it was well literally all sand we never got into them until oil happened. Also, Israel has taken a lot of land from other countries Sheeba farms being part of it, but they never gave it back, and you still wonder? War is War, but still should give back whats not theirs. Like Germany did, Russia did, and so on. I guess Israel somehow is better than any country and it shouldn't do anything that the UN says, but only what it wants to do and when its beneficial to them.

Btw
The whole anti-zionist movement seems to be the new form of antisemitism
Really? I won't comment on that, but very funny.

We are not dealing with two nation states, but rather a nation that has been defending itself for around 60 years and a bunch of savages who will never be satisfied. There is no end to the fight against radical islam until either the world is converted or the islamists are wiped out - any middle ground will merely be a waiting period before more issues (terrorism and its buildup).
Again, go to my previous reply, but the nation didn't exist, there have always been Jews there living with the Palestinians, when we got into it is when the shit really hit the fan. I bet you something, if we stop meddling with them and let them be who they are, it will better for us, but that will never happen. We started support Israel in the late 40's and we will never stop.

Are you Jewish by any chance? Because you take it to the heart.
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
Countries exist due to international recognition and the ability to defend themselves. The same way as crimea is now a part of russia Isreal has defended itself against various enemies in multiple wars, gaining territory from their opponents. This kind of behavior was fine when European powers did it back in WW1, WW2, the centuries of wars before these wars going back to the dawn of time - why is it bad now? You seem keen on getting palestinians land, what land would you give them - would you just give all the people who call themselves palestinian all the land in isreal? How is this any different then what the british did with the jews? Do specific people have claim to certain land in isreal? If this is the path you tread why not give the natives in US and Canada their land back - it's only been 200+ years of oppression and genocide.

How does the presence of a country before a war matter, the US did not exist as a country previous to the revolutionary war. BTW I'm Pamunkey.
Small tribe, no? Any idea of the amount of people with Pamunkey heritage beyond those with official status?
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
Probably under 500 living that can claim more than 1/16, despite all the people claiming they are descendents of pocohantes. Basically anyone who left the rez is not official, since except for the affirmative action years there have been heavy biases against natives especially in the south. This led to people claiming to be white, ergo anyone who was less than 1/2 pamunkey would not be considered official and unable to get official status.
So how is life on the rez? Economics are good or not?
 

Thruth

thicker but more pliant than horsehide
Moderator
Messages
19,011
Ratings
23,871
Don't live on the rez, economics are much much better when you go out on your own and make something of yourself. Like you I found that hard work and talent could vastly improve my personal situation. I hope to enable others to experience the same rewards and gains that I have.
Good plan. Just was wondering on how things were. Small population, small Rez area. How it compares to other rez's
 

OfficePants

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
9,933
Ratings
4,317
I had assumed you meant the oil embargo. My mistake.

My point still stands. I don't know why we need a plan to invade countries we probably even shouldn't be recognizing as legal nations.
We don't. It's done because of the banality of evil. It's the same reason these nations exist to begin with. Our banality is that people below the levers of power... fuck it. I'm starting a thread.
 

fxh

OG Party Suit Wearer
Supporter
Messages
5,773
Ratings
5,671
Banality of evil - is about the fact that Hitler, Pol Pot, etc don't have horns and thousand yard stare like $cientologists*, but that they are "normal" people. Doing normal tasks. These days its making a great spreadsheet - of all those to be put to death. Or a "scientific" study of torture. Or making sure people sign the register before buying a gun and going postal. Ordinary everyday banality.

The outliers are the ISIS barbarians. The majority of barbarians go about their spreadsheets and love their families, kids and pets. Oh and their god.

* well maybe they do stare like $cientologists.
 
Top Bottom