Clinton V Trump - into the final three weeks.

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

new thread. :)

The US is the aggressor in Syria.
On civilian targets? During ceasefires?
Nobody is covering themselves in glory there, but the Syrian government has also supported terrorist factions for decades.

It is an aggressor against a foreign sovereign power.

There are appalling regimes everywhere. Should the US sponsor coups and / or invade them all?

The US has also supported terrorist factions. It still does.

20 years ago Clinton aide was employed, apparently purely as a figurehead, on a magazine that published stuff that Clinton has never agreed with. Oh well, game over then, Clinton is irredeemably tainted.

11 years ago, Trump personally talked about how he used his position to assault women sexually. Nothing to see here, move on.

serendipity

Same old same old

far from disagreeing she's acknowledged that she's learned the most about Islam from huma.

Learning about Islam doesn't equate to agreeing with all its tenets. Surely it's desirable for any politician to do that?

Obviously not but if you are getting most of your education from an Islamist sympathiser who you consider to be a second daughter, it matters.

If you look at fours post earlier you will see the 'enabling' which is worrying people like us.

I mean obviously doesn't equate, not obviously not desirable. Spots for confusion

Apols not spots

That argument simply doesn't work, WW, because Clinton's worst enemy wouldn't suggest she endorses the misogynist views of some supporters of Islam.

Anything to say about Trump's endorsement of sexual assault?

I'm curious, are left wing people now western hating? I had no idea. Does that mean I hate the west, but don't know it, or does that mean I'm not actually left wing?

and what on earth is an intersectional right, or relativism? What does that sentence mean in plain english?

No kitten that's a specific group. Not you I gather! Intersectional rights is the right of Muslims to exercise their religious rights when they conflict with the rights of women.

Cultural relativism = eg marrying off 12 year olds is ok cos it's culture innit

I mean not always Muslims and women. Any religion, any minority group, Catholics, gay whatever if their rights conflict

Thank you for explaining!

WinchesterWoman, please could you explain more about how you see the US as an aggressor against a foreign sovereign power in Syria?

Syria is a sovereign power and we are funding and arming a rebellion. Obama's red line is Assad removal that is regime change in a sovereign power.

Every conversation needs to acknowledge this before discussion of Assad's cruelty and Russian involvement.

Thank you for your reply, WW, I wasn't sure what angle your previous comment was coming from. Interference in the internal affairs of another state is horribly complicated, of course, ethically and politically (and practically), and I don't know whether I agree with US policy or not. I do think there is a legitimate humanitarian aspect to it, but it's been indecisive and token (as has the UK's, I think).

I don't think that the relatively minor role that the US plays in active opposition to the Assad regime is of comparable significance to Assad's cruelty or Russian disregard of the laws of armed conflict, though.

I agree that Assad is most disgusting. Personally I feel us intervention is not driven by humanitarianism but by global power play.

if you are getting most of your education from an Islamist sympathiser

Is she? Is your evidence still that magazine?

And is there any evidence that Hillary is in favour of Islamism at all? Or that she suspected at any time of links between Human and terrorists? Or did the FBI or the CIA?

On Syria.

The Bush administration started off working on the destabilization of Syria at about the time Syria refused to support the Iraq invasion.

The uprising started in 2011. The uprising started as the Syrian government didn't allow any challenge, and reports kept coming out of people being arrested and disappearing since 2001.

Massacre of 200 people by the Syrian government in 2011.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Hama_(2011)

"By the end of May 2011, 1,000 civilians[182] and 150 soldiers and policemen[183] had been killed and thousands detained;[184] among the arrested were many students, liberal activists and human rights advocates."
"Significant armed rebellion against the state began on 4 June"

The CIA head declares in December that unmarked forces started arriving in Syria. Initially with non-lethal aid, but then with weapons.

Clearly the timeline is, unless you are saying that the CIA led the initial protests, massacres first, US intervention later.
Regardless, and even in a civil war, there was no need for massacres, particularly of civilians. Or to make disappear political opponents.

Also, Russia has been actively and intimately supporting the Assad regime from decades earlier and certainly during 2011, reinforcing Assad's weaponry and intervening in the attacks.

"The advisers have been deployed with new surface-to-air systems and upgrades of old systems, which Moscow has supplied to the Assad regime since the Syrian revolution broke out 21 months ago." (Dec 2012)
www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/23/syria-crisis-russian-military-presence

Russia has also blocked international investigations into atrocities in Syria.
"However, in the face of a Russian veto at the UN security council, the international criminal court has not had a mandate to investigate the atrocities committed by either side."

Just been reading this. Very interesting:

twitter.com/hectormorenco

Sorry

Was looking at fours link and found this

That map and red line are very convincing. We thought emails would bring down HRC but instead it was a sharpie and a ruler