Senate Gun Control

He's got a secret beard under his tie.

 

Well, without guns to defend themselves from the Government and 14,000,000 home invasions with INTENT TO KILL, Muricans would be helpless to resist the halal foods and customs of the Islams that would take them over!

...

Can I just say, giving 0 or less than 0 ****s if you're offended, that if you say you need a gun to defend yourself you're a moron without redemption?

I mean, I can say it. I've said it. It's true.

 

I disagree about the "without redemption" part.

 

If you believe the NRA propaganda machine there's a level of assumed baseline intelligence which is in very blunt terms "unfit for purpose".

 

All I saw with the US returning to Iraq in 2003 was finishing what they weren't allowed to do back in 1991, finish what they started.

 

This is important.

 

Which the vastly more intelligent George HW Bush noted, in his published memoir, was the right decision.

Of course the new American conservative has no use for facts, culture, restraint or intelligence:

"While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome"

- George HW Bush and Brent Scowcroft, "A World Transformed", p489 (1998).

BUT WE DONE GIT SAYDAM WHICH THEY YOU-NIIIIII-TED NAYSHUNS DIDN'T DONE ALLOWED US TO GIT DONE HOW CAN WE GIVE THEM EYE-RACK-EE PEOPLE FREEDOMS OTHERWISE?

 

I don't know what this means. I am old enough to remember Desert Storm. Iraq invaded Kuwait. We sent troops in. Iraq was forced to leave Kuwait.

We finished what we started.

The Iraq War in 2003 was insanity. There was absolutely no reason to go in, so they lied.

 

George Snr did it right. Collect up local allies so you are legitimate, free Kuwait... a simple achievable goal, then get the hell out.
George Jnr ignored all that care and thoughtfulness and fell for the right wing tough guy approach.

 

I dislike how the Gulf War is painted as the Right Thing. The United States intervened to prop up the oligarchies of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and ensure access to their oil wealth. The H.W. Bush administration encouraged Shi'a and Kurdish Iraqis to rise up against Saddam Hussein and then abandoned them as Saddam's forces put them down. Prior to the Gulf War, the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein as a secular bulwark against the Islamic Republic of Iran. The U.S. and other Western countries facilitated military aid for his brutal war of aggression against Iraq's neighbor (one the U.S. wasn't friends with, so it was okay) and abetting his use of chemical weapons against the Iranians and Iraqi Kurds. During the 1990's the (first) Clinton administration imposed sanctions against Iraq that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, mostly children. Bush's 2003 invasion was only an aberration in the scale of U.S. commitment; ultimately, it was just the latest in a long line of **** the U.S. has hurled toward Iraq and Western Asia. I don't think the United States or indeed the West has ever done right by the region in and around the Tigris and Euphrates.

But hey, this totally has nothing to do with our gun problem.

 

Iraq was mostly illegitimate because of the whole fake "stealing incubators from babies" stuff.

Which shockingly was a Republican lie.

Incidentally I do apologise Zeta, for whatever damage my sharp tongue does to the structural integrity of your bubble.

Dear Americans

About all that money your elected officials have taken to avoid basically enacting sensible legislation that would diminish the profits and sales of vested interest groups...

If only you had people who believed strongly in a constitutional amendment that empowered - nay, compelled - them to take up arms against an unjust and corrupt state.

Christ, they'd be scared wouldn't they!

...

 

Cool. I wasn't defending the moral conduct of the war.

 

No damage here. I know the US has made plenty of mistakes over the years, Iraq in 2003 was probably a mistake, and plenty of mistakes were made in the 80s with Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan, but I would rather focus on the good we have done and learn form the mistakes.

 

That's an extraordinary privilege you have to be able to say that.

"Mistakes were made."

 

Oh I didn't mean to imply Desert Storm was a "just" war or something. I only meant that we had an objective and met that objective. I don't think George HW Bush was doing it for morals.

And focus on the good? What good?

 

Half a million dead because conservative Americans are too arrogant, ignorant and insular to understand the world is more complex than a bunch of equally insipid twits sitting round with a big stiffy for Murican Freedom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

Anyone who has a quarter of a percent of intelligence knew bin Laden was at war with Saddam. They knew that the WMD programme was not a threat, as a result. BUT, to secure oil, half a million had to die PLUS Islamic State had to rise.

WELL DONE AMERICA YOU GUYS ARE JUST TOPS.

Plus you can effectively manage your gun violence issues. Such a great country.

 

Well, it was moreso than that - in the 90s, the neocons had formulated a brilliant strategy to 'effect change' in the Middle East, and they jumped for joy at the opportunity to put it into action. The idea was that once Iraq fell and a US-friendly government was installed, we could roll right into Iran.

...but since ultimately the British are the cause of most of the world's problems, I lay any gun control issues in the US firmly on their doorstep.

 

Yes, not executing religious purists meant that the colonies of North America had a much lower IQ to begin with. Breeding imbecile with cretin only lowered it, until "GOVERNMENT DONE GIT GONE MY GRUNS!" became something people said unironically.

 

I still think Chris Rock was on to something with his bullet control skit. Looks like you can get a 30 round magazine for an AR 15 rifle for $11 online. Does the second amendment apply to bullets?

 

I was thinking along the lines of having an insane king.

 

Which is no excuse for colonial terrorism.

 

Come on, Zeta. I typed up a concise but very exact rundown of the proceedings for you. There is nothing in what I wrote that's untrue, you can fact-check every claim. And this is your reply? It's the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears. You don't even back it up with anything. Is it conceivable to you that "all you saw" wasn't all that was happening? Is it conceivable that you've only heard half of the history?

Alright, so my role here now is history professor. Greg, you're almost right. Except for the "and then get the hell out". The devil is in the details. The troops left behind, small in number though they were, were the prime reason for the rise of Al-Qaida. Imagine Soviets stationing troops on Times Square to get a rough idea.