Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The stalemate in Syria is in the best interests of the USA. Neither Assad not the rebels are friendly to us but, while they are busy fighting each other, cannot harm us. We should ensure that the violent stalemate continues for as long as possible.
I think that President Obama and his fine staff are on top of this.
First, verify with absolute certainty that chemical weapons were used. Don't make a bunch of assumptions from inaccurate, unreliable, or incomplete data like Dubya did with the WMD claim in Iraq. Get the real scoop first. The President has done this as Kerry so effectively stated yesterday.
Second, garner support from the international community. If action must be taken, it is wise to not go it alone like Dubya did. "If you're not with us, you're against us!", "Wanted: Dead of Alive!" - this was Neanderthal diplomacy at its finest under the village idiot. If we are to employ military action, many nations will be involved. Many different mechanisms will be employed too, not just strictly relying on military action. Military action should be the last resort, or a small component of an overall course of action.
Third, craft an effective response. Not that stupid "shock and awe" military-only BS that Republicans drooled over during the Dubya years. Be smart, effective, and minimize putting our soldiers in harms way. President Obama is a highly intelligent President. He listens to all sides, invites views even from the opposition. I'm confident that whatever decision he makes, will be an effective one.
Because President Obama is at the helm, those who were responsible for those chemical weapons are in serious, serious trouble. This wouldn't be the case if Bush or any Republican were in office.
CHANGE...is coming to Syria.
Why not let the world community do the fighting then?
"You have no proof Assad gassed anyone", "Your statement about the Jews is disgusting", "There's a very good chance that the stakes could get very high".
the situation in Syria is very confused. But ask yourself - why the Assad government does not let UN check all objects-have something to hide. Why Assad supports by "russian" federation? because this is a military-police regime is the same as in RF - where half the population is in the police and in the army in security companies, etc., You understand me... that British and American naval forces there are( well that Britain helps in this case the US). But a protracted ground invasion is profitable for suppliers of weapons. It really nice that the US and Britain, along with many other developed countries) do not agree with the Assad regime . But we must not forget that when Assad leaves Israel would want to engage army of the USA and Britain against Iran(possible military bases in Syria). the heads of the transnational banks interested in this war....
Are you serious? Is this satire? Part of the reason Assad is doing this is because he thinks our current president is weak and that "redlines in the sand" are nothing more than blurbs to feed Obama's adoring media, so he isn't afraid of American reprisals. This is the ultimate no-win situation.
This is an article by Peter Bergen of CNN which explains the "calculus" of any military action the U.S. might take toward Syria. It is not long, and it is informative
This is a lengthier, but not horribly long, article about why the U.S. will/should intervene militarily.
I have never wanted our forces to get involved in this. But the gassing of citizens, men, women and children is a heinous offense. I suspect that Assad feels he is not making progress, or is not doing so fast enough. So he murdered Syrian civilians. The second article puts him in the same class as Hitler and Mussolini.
At least after reading it I understand why the U. S. feels it must act. Apparently the government will use cruise missiles, not air power or boots on the ground. Even if you don't want our government to act, reading these pieces will help you understand why it is deemed important to do so.
I am on the fence on this. What do you think?
The first article is no longer available and the second seems to be in a loop, offering the login screen instead of the article.
Civilians get murdered in battleplaces around the globe. That's never the actual reason for US intervention, nor should it be - that would be an expensive strategic mess. US foreign policy is not based on concerns over the fate of civilians. It derives from geopolitics and financial goals, which are closely entwined. Something like the Roberts article in the WSJ is merely how the government slaps a happy humanitarian face on its actions.
Which brings us to...
You only believe that because the US government claimed it was so. What gives you so much faith in the US government to be truthful in such matters? One of the main lessons from the Iraq war (and really, many wars before that) is that the government will claim what it wants to claim, and if that happens to intersect with the actual truth of things, all the better. If not, no problem.
So to summarize:
-You have no proof Assad gassed anyone.
-Even if Assad did, it is not a problem to be resolved at American taxpayer expense. A map will reveal that Syria is a good 5,000 miles from American shores. Thankfully.
It would be foolish to erase that distance with a silly military "intervention."
That's it in a nutshell.
Assad's opponents are Al Quada or sympathizers. They are not moderates. Remember how the ex government in Egypt was supposed to be moderate, even though they are members of the Muslim Brotherhood? If we go against Assad, who the heck do you think will take his place - a guy supporting democracy or a radical anti-American terrorist type?
Assad may not have done this, because the repercussion of this is playing right into the hands of the extremists and it is not past their philosophy to kill innocents to further their cause.
Even if Assad DID do this, we should not intervene because we would only be giving power to the hands of OUR enemies, wouldn't we?
The US reaction seems to me to be some ego thing on the part of Obama because the use of these weapons was on the very day that was the anniversary of when Obama drew the line in the sand, a year ago, speaking against the use of such weapons with threats. So now Obama's ego is hurt and he feels he has to react. Bull - I don't want our involvement in another war with innocent people killed and which will further erode world opinion of us just because of a President's hurt feelings.
The stalemate in Syria is in the best interests of the USA. Neither Assad not the rebels are friendly to us but, while they are busy fighting each other, cannot harm us. We should ensure that the violent stalemate continues for as long as possible.
Maybe they will use up all the WMDs that were smuggled in from Iraq before we invaded.
I think that President Obama and his fine staff are on top of this.
First, verify with absolute certainty that chemical weapons were used. Don't make a bunch of assumptions from inaccurate, unreliable, or incomplete data like Dubya did with the WMD claim in Iraq. Get the real scoop first. The President has done this as Kerry so effectively stated yesterday.
Second, garner support from the international community. If action must be taken, it is wise to not go it alone like Dubya did. "If you're not with us, you're against us!", "Wanted: Dead of Alive!" - this was Neanderthal diplomacy at its finest under the village idiot. If we are to employ military action, many nations will be involved. Many different mechanisms will be employed too, not just strictly relying on military action. Military action should be the last resort, or a small component of an overall course of action.
Third, craft an effective response. Not that stupid "shock and awe" military-only BS that Republicans drooled over during the Dubya years. Be smart, effective, and minimize putting our soldiers in harms way. President Obama is a highly intelligent President. He listens to all sides, invites views even from the opposition. I'm confident that whatever decision he makes, will be an effective one.
Because President Obama is at the helm, those who were responsible for those chemical weapons are in serious, serious trouble. This wouldn't be the case if Bush or any Republican were in office.
CHANGE...is coming to Syria.
Like the other poster, I find it hard to believe that this is not intended as a spoof. Based on posting history however, it would seem that it is intended as serious.
In other words, there was no doubt that Saddam had engaged in the same activities as apparently Assad has now done. Yet look at the disparity in reaction from the left. With Saddam they screamed that he should be left alone. With Assad, they scream that a red line has been crossed, and we must take action.
It's interesting to note that there is no longer even a pretense that "partisanship stops at the water's edge." Partisanship not only doesn't stop, it arguably intensifies.
I think it doesn't add up. You have a country that has everything to loose and nothing to gain by using chemical weapons. On the otherside you have a country that has wanted a reason to wipe out Iran and take Syria with it. It is in our interest to create the problem so we can get what we want.
The media does NO reporting, they regurgitate what they are told and nothing more.
Do you think you know the truth? watch the video and then comment... for those that comment without watching, you have no idea what you are talking about so STHU
Sure is a shame that we used up all our World Police capital on Iraq, isn't it?
Not at all. I think it is great that a terrorist sponsoring nation is under attack by the very terrorists they help to create. It is perfect irony, and we should stay out of it completely.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
