I read about Kerry's speech yesterday and was catching up on what's going on over there. It is going to be interesting to watch how the Obama administration handles this. They seem to be smack dab in the middle of a very similar situation to Bush and Iraq.
I think it's time for us to stop sticking our nose in other countries' business. _________________ If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
Confirmation of the use of chemical weapons is the point at which the global community would need to get involved.
Doubtful we will see boots on the ground not labeled "UN". Much more likely is a whole bunch of cruise missles and perhaps a no-fly zone.
Syria is a party to the Geneval Protocol, which makes this even more disturbing.
Putin is going to look like a complete retard in the eyes of the world if he makes any attempt to stop this from happening. And if one of the missiles he recently sold to Syria hits a coalition aircraft, he's going to have serious egg on his face. He could jeopardize the upcoming Sochi olympics, given the political tensions those acts may cause. _________________
What ever we do, they damn well better get approval from congress first. I'm sick and tired of the prez launching missles at folks and other acts of war with out getting congressional approval. _________________ Work SUX!
Okie Boarder, you mean other than all the dead people with no discernible injuries?
Proof of which side launched the attacks.
Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof,” that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.
Think about it, by all accounts, Assad was slowly winning and the rebel victories were becoming rarer and rarer. Why would he risk an international backlash when the place that was attacked was not even of strategic importance? We, OTOH, have been looking for a way to support the rebels, (which is none of our business) and this gives us an entry point. Polls show only 9% of Americans support military intervention there. I'm certainly in the 91% majority. I was wrong in hindsight supporting the war in Iraq and I naively bought the story the CIA was selling. Like I said, who is providing the proof? Our CIA? Fool me once... _________________
Rhawn wrote:
You should have a less retarded friend read over your posts before you hit "Submit"
P.S. - If the U.N. investigation does prove that it was the rebels that launched the attack, are we supposed to help quash the rebellion and provide support to Assad? _________________
Rhawn wrote:
You should have a less retarded friend read over your posts before you hit "Submit"
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1123 City: Brentwood, CA
Posted: Aug 27, 2013 11:03 am Post subject:
RampageWake wrote:
Assad was slowly winning and the rebel victories were becoming rarer and rarer. Why would he risk an international backlash when the place that was attacked was not even of strategic importance?
That is exactly what I've been reading as well. Assad really has nothing to gain by gassing his people but a whole lot to lose. This definitely doesn't smell right.
What ever we do, they damn well better get approval from congress first. I'm sick and tired of the prez launching missles at folks and other acts of war with out getting congressional approval.
Agreed. _________________ If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1123 City: Brentwood, CA
Posted: Aug 27, 2013 11:25 am Post subject:
Also, we had better hope it was Assad who launched these chemical attacks. If it wasn't his regime, there's a pretty good chance Al-Qaeda has their hands on a few. Not good.
Do the rebels possess such capability? That is the question I'd be asking. It's not like you can just find sarin at the neighborhood 7-11. Ricin on the other hand, can be obtained pretty easily, but dispersing it over a large area is a different story altogether, you need tons of the stuff.
I dunno, I think we really need to figure out the who and how here.
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1123 City: Brentwood, CA
Posted: Aug 27, 2013 12:46 pm Post subject:
I read this comment on another message board and it pretty much sums up my exact feelings.
Quote:
So, are you planning on picking up a gun and enlisting to the frontline? How about your children? Will you send them when the draft card comes? Or, are you just the usual hypocrite who plans on sitting on their couch watching someone else's son or daughter die in YET ANOTHER war we have no business being involved with. I wonder......what's the running record in years that the USA has NOT been involved in some type of war, conflict, or "operation"?? I bet it's not very long. I, for one, am tired of fighting---and PAYING---for wars we did not start or have any hope of resolving. Unless you plan on taking over the entire world, there's ALWAYS going to be someone being oppressed! ALWAYS!
I do appreciate all of the above and take military action VERY seriously.
However, chemical weapon and other WMD use is a huge deal. It is shitty that actions to prevent WMD proliferation and use are painted with the smear of the Iraq war debacle. The risk of inaction is far too great. _________________ Is President Obama a Keynesian?
P.S. - If the U.N. investigation does prove that it was the rebels that launched the attack, are we supposed to help quash the rebellion and provide support to Assad?
Technically, we are required (by the Geneva Conv) to help find those responsible and bring them to trial. _________________
I find it funny that the liberals find it acceptable that Obama move forward on sketchy evidence of WMD AND move forward with military action without Congressional approval. Didnt they just bash Bush for the same thing during his time in office? Hmmmmm
I find it funny that the Republicans are blasting the Dems for doing the SAME thing they approved Bush doing...I watch and read everything from Al Jazeera to Fox. Last night they had Ann Coulter on fox and she was literally foaming at the mouth bashing Obama for getting mixed up in this war. Just a decade again she was wrapping herself in the flag and praising Bush for going to war in the same scenario..What a hypocrite!
There is no win in this scenario. Even if WMD are used we are basically helping Al Qaeda if we turn the tide for the FSA/Al Nusra. Al Nusra is nothing more than Al Qaeda. Its danged if you do, danged if you dont. Anyone that makes this a black and white issue is a shill for one or the other political parties. Syria is in a hard spot...Iran is in a hard spot...Russia is in a hard spot..America and "Obamas red line" are in a hard spot.....This is a lose/lose situation. This situation means a couple of things for Americans which are more war, more debt and more enemies we dont need.
Lets be honest Bin Laden won the war on terror. He successfully pulled the US into a regional war in the ME that has no end and he stripped the US citizens from the very thing the US government claimed was its moral high ground (freedom). This will end with us like Russia which is absolutely broke with not a friend in sight. The hand writing is on the wall..
This is the best thing I've seen on Syria. Its middle of the road non conspiracy news regarding Syria.
_________________ You know you own someone when you can agitate them enough to quote you in their signature.
If there is a time to stick your nose into other countries business the use of Chemical Warfare is the time.
But, then we get into the proof, accusations, Bush lied, ......scenario.
I've been reading up on this a little more to better understand it. It seems there is an unclear directive when the chemical weapons are used within a state's own borders in a civil conflict. That seems like good enough reason to me for us to stay out of it, for now. _________________ If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
Here's the story that went along with the link I had seen on another forum.
UPDATE: Britam has admitted that it was hacked but denied that the emails released by the hacker were genuine. Click here for a statement by a Britam spokesman.
Alleged hacked emails from defense contractor Britam reveal a plan “approved by Washington” and funded by Qatar to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime, fulfilling what the Obama administration has made clear is a “red line” that would mandate US military intervention.
The leaked emails, obtained by a hacker in Germany, feature an exchange (click here for screenshot) between Britam Defence’s Business Development Director David Goulding and the company’s founder Philip Doughty;
Phil
We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.
We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.
Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?
Kind regards
David
The fact that the plan involves delivering a CW (chemical weapon) that is “similar to those Assad should have,” clearly suggests that the idea is to stage a false flag chemical weapons attack that could be blamed on Assad by Gulf states like Qatar and NATO powers.
If the claim that such as plot was “approved by Washington” can be verified, then the Obama administration is complicit in a war crime. _________________ If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
It wouldn't be any fun unless we had a conspiracy theory to go along with this whole situation. _________________ If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
Anti-war Pelosi is a hawk right now... The hypocrisy is fierce in that one.
That said I was regrettably hawkish post 9/11 about Iraq. Afghanistan had to happen but the lesson from that round was the American people do not have the appetite for true victory. We enter with conflicting objectives and handcuff our soldiers with rules to help the PR campaign. I'm not willing to enter a multi-faction civil war without the intent to level stuff and become the occupying force. I understand the horrors that are taking place and while the extension of Article 3 of the Geneva Convention in this manner is an interesting theoretical exercise, are we willing to put boots on the ground and risk young American lives in this hell hole for an undetermined goal and incomplete victory? I'm not so sure. _________________ If I agreed with you we would both be wrong.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Stats
Favorites
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
