Support NeoGAF

[xbhaskarx]

So no, your hard-core, fundamentalist Jihadi probably won't be any more outraged by a Syrian invasion than he would be by an Iraqi one. But how about your average Syrian

A large number of the people involved with Iraqi terrorist groups are from Syria, it was pretty easy to get across the Syria-Iraq border for a long time even after the US invasion. They were also the only two countries ruled by the Baath Party, and Syria still is.

 

[j_k_redtail]

A large number of the people involved with Iraqi terrorist groups are from Syria, it was pretty easy to get across the Syria-Iraq border for a long time even after the US invasion.

Then isn't reasonable to assume that invading Syria would create more of a problem for us?

 

[Barrett2]

I'm curious--is Bush the one who ultimately stopped Cheney from implementing this plan? If so, in a backwards way, W could have been the guy who actually saved America.

Seriously, though, Cheney is insane. The plan is absolutely insane. That would have done damage to our worldwide appeal that could never be undone.

After the re-election, when it was apparent the Iraq War was a disaster, Bush realized the Neo-Cons were utopian nuts who had run America's foreign policy into the ground. The last three years of the W administration, Cheney was basically ignored.

The insane part of this is that in the eyes of many people, Neoconservative foreign policy is so bizarrely and incoherently assumed to be compatible with the new Tea Party bullshit. None of it makes any sense. It's all a grab bag of utopian ideas with little substance backing them up.

 

[mercenar1e]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUPMjC9mq5Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKKKgua7wQk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht8PmEjxUfg

You can thank a majority of those people, and the people who think as they do and lack any thread of common sense. DERRRRR IM A PROUD AMURICAN VOTER DERP, WAIT WAT AM I VOTING FOR AGAIN?

The best and brightest this country has to offer :lol

 

[xbhaskarx]

Then isn't reasonable to assume that invading Syria would create more of a problem for us?

I'm not following your logic... a large number of Syrian militants are already fighting against the US military, even without Syria being invaded.

Another thing: the ruling al-Assad family is from a minority ethnic group (1.35 million out of ~20) that many Syrians, including jihadis, probably wouldn't mind seeing lose their power.

 

[Aaron Strife]

America, how did this man get to be one pretzel away from being your Commander in Chief?

 

[UrokeJoe]

 

[ryutaro's mama]

Americans would say that today, but if Bush/Cheney had pushed for this right after 9/11, I'm pretty sure Americans would go for it. Just look at how the administration was able to get us into Iraq.

Americans?

Sure.

All Americans?

Fuck no.

 

[j_k_redtail]

I'm not following your logic...

Another thing: the ruling al-Assad family is from a minority ethnic group that many Syrians, including jihadis, probably wouldn't mind seeing lose their power.

If I'm understanding you correctly: many of terrorists who shot at/are shooting at us in Iraq came from outside the country. I agree with that, since I've read that too.

But not all of them were. Many of the attackers were home-grown Iraqis - and I tend to think that if we invaded Syria we'd have to deal with home-grown insurgents there, who may not have been motivated to cross the border. In other words, we'd be making an enemy where one did not previously exist.

Sure, al-Assad family may not be popular among Syrians, whether their Jihadis or not. But then, neither was Saddam Hussein, and look how that turned out. He was a secular thug when he wasn't at war with us, after all. In fact, if I remember correctly, Saddam was in a minority group, too. I don't necessarily believe that removing a disliked ruler will make us a friend of the population, because we're still an invading army.

My point is this: the more Islamic nations we invade, the more nation populations we have to pacify, and the more we reinforce this idea of a Clash of Civilizations rather than a war on extremism.

 

[ralexand]

Hate to say it, but Bush might've actually been somewhat of a balancing force.

I know this is not going to be a popular belief, but personally, the more I hear about the past administration, the less I hate Bush but the more I hate Cheney. Yes, I'm aware that the buck stops with the President, but I just don't see Bush as pure evil -- more like incompetent.

I agree, but I never bought into the rhetoric that Bush was the cause of everything that's wrong in the world.

 

[theignoramus]

I'm not following your logic...

Another thing: the ruling al-Assad family is from a minority ethnic group (1.35 million out of ~20) that many Syrians, including jihadis, probably wouldn't mind seeing lose their power.

Yeah, but they would mind a foreign attack and occupation of their country.
We have Iraq as a test case.
Most Iraqis were happy to be rid of Saddam. The Jihadi movement HATED Saddam with a passion. Bin Laden wanted the Saudis to allow him to carry out as Jihad against Saddam in the early 90s.
Nonetheless the Iraq war spawned a new generation of Islamic radicals and made the threat of terror worse than it was before 9/11.
Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat
Look, you cant deny it anymore, Western intelligence agencies are saying the same thing:

Ex-MI5 boss says war raised terror threat
"Our involvement in Iraq, for want of a better word, radicalised a whole generation of young people, some of them British citizens who saw our involvement in Iraq, on top of our involvement in Afghanistan, as being an attack on Islam," she said, before immediately correcting herself by adding "not a whole generation, a few among a generation"
MI5 did not "foresee the degree to which British citizens would become involved" in terrorist activity after 2004, she admitted.

"What Iraq did was produce fresh impetus on people prepared to engage in terrorism," she said, adding that she could produce evidence to back this up.

"The Iraq war heightened the extremist view that the West was trying to bring down Islam. We gave Bin Laden his jihad."

 

[Ether_Snake]

Fact: Cheney wanted to do this back in the late 90s. Not just after 9/11. So the whole "9/11 changed him" thing is bullshit.

 

[Masta_Killah]

Americans?

Sure.

All Americans?

Fuck no.

Not all Americans, but I would believe a good majority of them would be for it. It be just like the beginnings of the Iraq war. Most everyone will get war fever and go with whatever the administration says.

 

[Incognito]

yeah, after the iraq war went to hell in a handbasket even W began dismissively referring to the neocons as 'the bomber boys' in a reference to 'Bombs away LeMay'. :lol

 

[shadowamlet]

Fact: Cheney wanted to do this back in the late 90s. Not just after 9/11. So the whole "9/11 changed him" thing is bullshit.

Holy $hit

 

[Plinko]

Not all Americans, but I would believe a good majority of them would be for it. It be just like the beginnings of the Iraq war. Most everyone will get war fever and go with whatever the administration says.

No. Not even close to being true. There was no "war fever." I remember the general mood was more of, "well, as long as it's just these countries." Anything on the scale of this idiotic plan by Cheney and I think support would have been well below where it was. There's absolutely zero way they could have justified it to the public.

 

[whytemyke]

We should bomb Britain now, just cuz they won't expect it at all. Then Obama can hold a press conference and go, "WILD CARD, BICHES!" and then explain how that's just a joke he stole from Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

 

[Kafel]

that's my boy

 

[Forkball]

"the world had to be remade after September the 11th."

 

[Tamanon]

Dammit, I was hoping Gendo wasn't posted yet. Psycho.:lol

 

[Dude Abides]

Did anyone listen to the interview on This Week? I listened to the podcast and it was very strange. Blair danced around most of the questions and this particular question in particular. He essentially made it sound like that his general impression of Cheney was that he wanted to essentially remake the ME but Blair didn't give specifics at all. He also kept saying things that sounded like he wished he could rewrite stuff in the book. He seemed very slippery and fake, even by politician standards.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

The Middle East itself being a focus was never a question in general. What makes these statements frightening is the complete lack of comprehension Blair seems to give (although I haven't read the entire book) the sheer idea of dropping bombs onto the Muslim world and invading it, using 9-11 as a justification to put a big X on the whole region. How the Iraq war then manifested itself into a reality, now considered based on a pack of lies, it us unreal to think these men and their policies are still in place in the world today.

 

[Brinbe]

Not surprising, but very scary...

 

[Socreges]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht8PmEjxUfg

Guy: America is the last bastion of hope.
NLM: You don't think there are any other bastions of hope?
Guy: No. No, I don't.
NLM: Canada, maybe?
Guy: No. No. This is the last bastion of hope right here.

Woman: *bullshit about immigration* (that had been said by several other interviewees)
NLM: *gives her new information, proving her wrong*
Woman: ...that's interesting.
NLM: *dagger*
Woman: ...well... all I know is what my sister tells me and she lives in Arizona. And she said she's seen pregnant women in parking lots, just waiting to have their babies. And that's sad.
NLM: But wouldn't there be pregnant women waiting to have their baby in hospital parking lots, even if they were here legally?
Woman: Yeah. But they're here legally!

My favourite parts.

 

[Socreges]

I think Cheney definitely wanted to completely change the Middle East well before 9/11, but there was always the problem of a population (American people) that would not support his ambitions. 9/11 was a gift in some ways for the Bush administration. It didn't really change the game, but made their next play much easier.

 

[Deku]

Sometimes, I feel like Cheney just made a 'bad' move in a game of civilization. He decided to invade another continent and chose the weakest Civ to conquer, but because of the bread v butter argument brought too few troops with him and and to deal with riots and civil unrest.

Cheney should have invaded Iran first, then nuked Pakistan. BEFORE invading Iraq.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

A few are making references to Cheney's Middle Eastern plans even before 9/11. Can you give me reputable sources?

 

[Jerk]

I don't think Bush was evil or really a bad guy.

Neither do I.

I think he was incompetent, misguided and weak, but he was probably an otherwise decent fella.

Unfortunately that is irrelevant. History will rightly remember him as being one of the worst presidents we have ever had.

 

[Socreges]

Cheney should have invaded Iran first, then nuked Pakistan. BEFORE invading Iraq.

I'm curious. Would you have actually liked him to do this?

 

[keuja]

It is known that Cheney and Rumsfeld used to write biblical quotes on the intelligence briefs they gave Bush (link), probably as a way to influence him.
There were also those reports of Bush phoning Chirac about Gog and Magog and Book of revelations (link). Blair is probably less gullible than Bush but I wonder if it could have somehow influenced him at that time too.

 

[Deku]

I'm curious. Would you have actually liked him to do this?

War is bad, I would have liked someone with more diplomatic tact to use the large amounts of accured good will the US had post 9/11, and undeoubtely, some eggs would have to be broken in the process. I support the Afghan war. I am of the view that if the left's ideal scenario of a humiliating imperial defeat of the US in Afghanistan were to come to pass, the world would be a worse place.

As for my comment, you need to take it in the context of a Civ game to understand it. It's dark humour.

 

[Ether_Snake]

A few are making references to Cheney's Middle Eastern plans even before 9/11. Can you give me reputable sources?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pnac

Some have regarded the PNAC's January 16, 1998 letter to President Clinton, which urged him to embrace a plan for "the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power,"[10] and the large number of members of PNAC appointed to the Bush administration as evidence that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a foregone conclusion.

[...]

Media commentators have found it significant that signatories to the PNAC's January 16, 1998 letter to President Clinton (and some of its other position papers, letters, and reports) included such later Bush administration officials as Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, John Bolton, Richard Armitage, and Elliott Abrams.

In relation to the Persian Gulf, citing particularly Iraq and Iran, Rebuilding America's Defenses states that "while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for U.S. military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the [Persian] Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" and "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the [Persian] Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region."[13]

One of the core missions outlined in the 2000 report Rebuilding America's Defenses is "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars."

Rebuilding America's Defenses "was developed by Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Libby, and is devoted to matters of 'maintaining US pre-eminence, thwarting rival powers and shaping the global security system according to US interests.'"

Yet when he was running with Bush in 2000, he ran on a campaign of no nation-building, bringing the troops home, and small government. :lol

 

[theignoramus]

It is known that Cheney and Rumsfeld used to write biblical quotes on the intelligence briefs they gave Bush (link), probably as a way to influence him.
There were also those reports of Bush phoning Chirac about Gog and Magog and Book of revelations (link). Blair is probably less gullible than Bush but I wonder if it could have somehow influenced him at that time too.

I heard about that Gog and Magog stuff earlier, but it seemed too outlandish to be true.:lol

 

[otake]

It is known that Cheney and Rumsfeld used to write biblical quotes on the intelligence briefs they gave Bush (link), probably as a way to influence him.
There were also those reports of Bush phoning Chirac about Gog and Magog and Book of revelations (link). Blair is probably less gullible than Bush but I wonder if it could have somehow influenced him at that time too.

You can't seriously believe a former commander in chief is that dense. Bush had an everyman image, the kind of guy you'd have a beer with. This was a carefully prepared image. He was a terrible president, made some bad decisions, but he wasn't stupid. None of these guys are stupid. He made bad decisions, I hope, will pain him till the day he dies. But these are smart men, who knew, or thought they did, the economical, social and political outcomes of their decisions.

 

[Ether_Snake]

It is known that Cheney and Rumsfeld used to write biblical quotes on the intelligence briefs they gave Bush (link), probably as a way to influence him.
There were also those reports of Bush phoning Chirac about Gog and Magog and Book of revelations (link). Blair is probably less gullible than Bush but I wonder if it could have somehow influenced him at that time too.

Ermmm, Blair is equally crazy, if not crazier.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1810020,00.html

 

[snesfreak]

Praise the lord and pass the ammunition!
I fucking hate Dick Cheney, fucking piece of shit war mongering asshole.

 

[soul creator]

hide ya arabs, hide ya persians, etc. etc.

Spoiler

this reference works in a surprising number of situations

 

[soundscream]

He who controls the oil controls the universe.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pnac
Yet when he was running with Bush in 2000, he ran on a campaign of no nation-building, bringing the troops home, and small government. :lol

These comments by Cheney really put things like that (you've highlighted) into a new perspective. If you have any other related material to this, I'd appreciate it.

 

[345triangle]

You should see British News. I was over there for a few weeks and it was all "American Policies killed xxx british soldiers today. Now onto the top 20 things we hate about how aggressive the US is..blah blah pretend we never went to war, we can join the anti-US clique too I swear! Let us sit at your lunch table Europe "

links please, that shit sounds funny but when i search for "crazy biased news" on youtube i just get US stuff

 

[iidesuyo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pnac

Yet when he was running with Bush in 2000, he ran on a campaign of no nation-building, bringing the troops home, and small government. :lol

How is this called in English... megalomania?

 

[DirtyHarry]

The Peter Principle at work here with incompetence being replaced by cruelty.

 

[mj1108]

I don't think Bush was evil or really a bad guy.

He wasn't evil or a bad guy....he was just a fucking moron.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Cheney is such a perfect "bad guy". They should really make a movie about him, even if it is only based on him. It would be perfect. The evil politician we love to hate.

At the end of the movie he would be on his death bed while peace trumpets outside with confettis flying in through the opened window, dying with his Penguin-expression stuck on his face.

He really is the "Old man yells at clouds".

 

[Ether_Snake]

These comments by Cheney really put things like that (you've highlighted) into a new perspective. If you have any other related material to this, I'd appreciate it.

I love this quote from Gary Schmitt when asked about PNAC' closure:

When the project started, it was not intended to go forever. That is why we are shutting it down. We would have had to spend too much time raising money for it and it has already done its job. We felt at the time that there were flaws in American foreign policy, that it was neo-isolationist. We tried to resurrect a Reaganite policy. Our view has been adopted.

But then you compare it to:

George W. Bush presidential campaign, 2000

# Foreign Affairs: Bush promised a humble foreign policy with no nation building. He had criticized the Clinton-Gore Administration for being too interventionist: "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road. And I'm going to prevent that."

If "September 11 changed all that" for Bush, it certainly didn't change anything for Cheney! The post 9/11 world was the same one that Cheney and the rest of the neocons that formed the core of the Bush administration lived in prior to 9/11.

We always hear in interviews about how Cheney changed after 9/11. What a load of unresearched bullshit just so they don't have to look further into his character. "Oh how cute, he was just an angry patriot! Can't blame him for being so angry after 9/11!" He was no different before then, he just gained arguments in his favor.

 

[bonesmccoy]

Praise the lord and pass the ammunition!
I fucking hate Dick Cheney, fucking piece of shit war mongering asshole.

And let's not forget he's a brave hero who tries to craft a tough guy image by supporting torture and indefinite imprisonment.

Ether_Snake: Virtually every new presidential administration criticizes the previous one for being too interventionist. I promise you that the next administration (which will not be Biden
16) will say the exact same thing about Obama.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Yeah but Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and many others part of the Bush administration were part of a group of people who were advocating for intervention overseas over the idea that the Clinton administration was too isolationist. Cheney was fucking vice-president of all things. And most of the others were appointed before 9/11. So you have a whole pack of people who openly said Clinton's administration were too isolationist, and then they all became part of the Bush administration, after Cheney himself ran the campaign with Bush hammering on about how Clinton had been too interventionist.

They pressured Clinton to attack Iraq, Cheney ran as vice-president and turned off his agenda for a few months of campaign, got a bunch of his PNAC buddies in power, and then turn his agenda radio back on after 9/11.

So Blair is a liar when he says 9/11 changed Cheney, just like many others who continue to spread this myth. They either got short memory, suffer from cognitive dissonance, or are liars.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

I wonder how Limbaugh will spin this one. Damn Republicans.

"If Cheney had his way, we wouldn't be worried about Hamas and Hezbollah. We would be witnessing a new era in middle eastern peace and liberty. free from the tyrany of islamo-facists and arcane rules. Where women could have been free to live without threat of being stoned to death. Where terrorism would have no place to gain a foot hold. because the liberated peoples of those countries would prefer their new found liberty and would fight to keep it. Thank Barack Obama for making sure these people stay in the dark ages and people in abject poverty, to be ever exploited by the murderous regiemes in the region. For keeping us enslaved to the those dictatorships for our energy."

something along those lines.

 

[speculawyer]

Tell us something we don't know.

 

[speculawyer]

I'm curious--is Bush the one who ultimately stopped Cheney from implementing this plan? If so, in a backwards way, W could have been the guy who actually saved America.

Seriously, though, Cheney is insane. The plan is absolutely insane. That would have done damage to our worldwide appeal that could never be undone.

Don't forget that Bush chose Cheney to be VP. So you can't say he protected us from the poison he selected.


And holy crap . . . imagine how bad our economy would be right now if we had gone ahead with such wars. We would be in collapse from government debt. Cheney's brain was still in 1950s thinking USA was king of the world. No . . . these days we are completely dependent on foreign oil, foreign debt financing, and cheap foreign labor. Our economy is hollow and Cheney didn't realize it. He probably still doesn't.