PDA

View Full Version : Syria has used chemical weapons. Now what?


whell
06-13-2013, 07:55 PM
Assad has used chemical weapons on his own citizens. Obama as stated that this would be a "red line". What the hell does that truly mean? What should be our response?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/13/us-confirms-chemical-weapons-syria/2420763/

Oerets
06-13-2013, 07:58 PM
Not a d@mm thing IMHO!


We will keep the devil we know in power as long as possible.


Barney

bobabode
06-13-2013, 08:06 PM
"Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said that the president has decided to step up "military support" to the main opposition group, the Supreme Military Council, to bolster its effectiveness." from your link, Mike.

"The United States has concluded that Syrian government forces used chemical weapons to kill at least 100 people, crossing a “red line” and prompting President Obama to provide direct military support to the rebels for the first time, the White House said Thursday."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-concludes-syrian-forces-used-chemical-weapons/2013/06/13/59b03c66-d46d-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html?hpid=z1

What would you prefer, Mike?

finnbow
06-13-2013, 08:13 PM
Yep, they used gas to kill over 100 people and conventional weapons to kill 90,000 with conventional weapons. I fail to see what's game-changing about the use of gas there, other than Obama's unfortunate comment.

Charles
06-13-2013, 08:36 PM
Assad works for the Rooskies, let them handle it. While we're at it, we should ask them if they want Afghanistan back.

I'll bet they're still laughing their asses off about us going back there after we were pretty much out.

I hate to say it, but whenever it comes to military intervention, we should do what America does best...bomb the shit out of the bastards and get home in time for supper.

Or better yet, let the Rooskies and the Chicoms deal with the crazy pricks. Then sit back on our asses and make money both ways.

Just joking...that's the international bankers gig. After all, no nation could afford an extended war, even us, without their financing.

And considering that our currency is based on debt, if we didn't borrow money to finance wars and all other kinds of ignorant bullshit, we'd all be broke...wouldn't we?

Chas

Dondilion
06-14-2013, 08:40 AM
Obama has painted himself in a corner. Goaded by interventionists and adventurers like McCaine he used the dumb words "red line".

Now he begins to look like the SON OF BUSH.

Lets take a hard look at the area.
The war in Syria started out as opposition to Assad but has now morphed into a sectarian conflict pitting Shia and non moslems against the Sunnis.
The most effective and prominent group in the opposition is Jabhat-al-Nusra which is now labeled a terrorist group by our own government.

So what are we going to do? Deliver effective armament to the Syrian opposition? :D

whell
06-14-2013, 11:29 AM
"Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said that the president has decided to step up "military support" to the main opposition group, the Supreme Military Council, to bolster its effectiveness." from your link, Mike.

"The United States has concluded that Syrian government forces used chemical weapons to kill at least 100 people, crossing a “red line” and prompting President Obama to provide direct military support to the rebels for the first time, the White House said Thursday."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-concludes-syrian-forces-used-chemical-weapons/2013/06/13/59b03c66-d46d-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html?hpid=z1

What would you prefer, Mike?

Well, it looks like the Obama team has elected the first option...

...which has prompted a response from the Ruskies:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323734304578545062769525132.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

CarlV
06-14-2013, 11:33 AM
Good, F--k Putin.
As long as we stay in the background.


Carl

Twodogs
09-03-2013, 04:28 PM
I think he dumped the red line on congress.

bobabode
09-03-2013, 04:48 PM
I think he dumped the red line on congress.
Congress demanded consultation in this without thinking of how it will make the neo isolationists on both sides of the aisle look to their constituents. (or maybe they did?;)) It will be very interesting to see which way the Libertarian/Tea Pahtay jumps on this one.:rolleyes:


The red line was written in to the first Geneva Convention via the outlawing the use of chemical weapons. I support the CINC's decision in this. We can't let this go by with our heads in the sand.

BlueStreak
09-03-2013, 04:53 PM
Yeah. How dare he follow the rules regarding military action now, after presidents have been ignoring them for decades.

BlueStreak
09-03-2013, 05:02 PM
It will be very interesting to see which way the Libertarian/Tea Pahtay jumps on this one.:rolleyes:

That's a tough one to call.

Let's see. The "Stalinist Kenyan who hates America, spit on soldiers as they returned from Vietnam when he was six years old and eats aborted Caucasian fetuses" is behind it.

Yeah, the folks who aren't really the haters they appear to be support it.:rolleyes:

mpholland
09-03-2013, 08:08 PM
As a constitutional law professor, Obama actually made a wise decision to go to Congress. Probably a win/win situation for him politically, too bad it might not be for the rest of the country.

bobabode
09-03-2013, 08:22 PM
As a constitutional law professor, Obama actually made a wise decision to go to Congress. Probably a win/win situation for him politically, too bad it might not be for the rest of the country.

Raytheon will like it. Wall Streeters will love it. The rest of the country doesn't really give a shit, they're disengaged from all the partisan bullcrap coming out of Washington.

Me? I'll get a kick outta watching the Tea Party disintegrate over this.:rolleyes:

icenine
09-03-2013, 08:26 PM
actually I am hoping this is where the McCain wing of the Party takes the Republicans back......it is really surprising that Boehner is supporting this without ....

and the delay will make Assad hold back at least.....he would be insane to do it again at this point in time

Rand Paul is the biggest loser.....supported Snowden, will eventually look weak in not coming out against a gas attack.....whether we strike or not

mpholland
09-03-2013, 08:52 PM
actually I am hoping this is where the McCain wing of the Party takes the Republicans back......it is really surprising that Boehner is supporting this without ....

and the delay will make Assad hold back at least.....he would be insane to do it again at this point in time

Rand Paul is the biggest loser.....supported Snowden, will eventually look weak in not coming out against a gas attack.....whether we strike or not

I am sure this will help.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics-live/the-senates-syria-hearing-live-updates/?id=ed01ca14-222b-4a23-b12c-c0b0d9d4fe0a

bobabode
09-03-2013, 09:03 PM
I am sure this will help.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics-live/the-senates-syria-hearing-live-updates/?id=ed01ca14-222b-4a23-b12c-c0b0d9d4fe0a

Gotta love Grumpie McCain's twitter response.:D

Dondilion
09-03-2013, 09:05 PM
In the meantime smart money says that radical Islamists are infiltrating the Syrian opposition favored by US.

icenine
09-03-2013, 10:08 PM
In the meantime smart money says that radical Islamists are infiltrating the Syrian opposition favored by US.

Assad is not a radical either?

tell me how what Assad has done to one of his neighborhoods is any different than what Al Quaeda did to New York. His bodycount is about 50 percent of 9-11 from one missle attack last week on his own city. So Assad can kill with impunity because of your fear of radical Islam? You are really starting to scare me.

Basically your OK with Assad? Is that what I am reading in all your posts?

Zeke
09-04-2013, 01:09 AM
I think he dumped the red line on congress.

Which is absolutely brilliant. :D

BlueStreak
09-04-2013, 05:04 AM
As a constitutional law professor, Obama actually made a wise decision to go to Congress. Probably a win/win situation for him politically, too bad it might not be for the rest of the country.

That remains to be seen, on all counts. I have my doubts.

merrylander
09-04-2013, 06:51 AM
Well it will sure make the GOP look stupid, along with some Dems as well.

piece-itpete
09-04-2013, 08:01 AM
So the left is on board with bombing Syria all of a sudden?

Pete

Dondilion
09-04-2013, 10:38 AM
Assad is not a radical either?

tell me how what Assad has done to one of his neighborhoods is any different than what Al Quaeda did to New York. His bodycount is about 50 percent of 9-11 from one missle attack last week on his own city. So Assad can kill with impunity because of your fear of radical Islam? You are really starting to scare me.

Basically your OK with Assad? Is that what I am reading in all your posts?

He is not a radical Islamist. He is fighting radical Islamists. (the well
organized and discipline Jabhat Al Nusra)

Radical Islamist has indicated and has shown a determination to get us anywhere.

The sectarian destruction in that region is endemic.

There is nothing significant we can do about that....Iraq is still burning.

Our proposed action in Syria is a face saving one.....to save the face of
a president and implicitly the face of a nation. The latter is the reason
why there is such a disparate combination of ideologues supporting the
president.

icenine
09-04-2013, 10:43 AM
Who brought Al Quaeda to Syria?
Assad did when he refused to back down and followed a scorched earth policy on his own people and country.

Dondilion
09-04-2013, 11:04 AM
Who brought Al Quaeda to Syria?
Assad did when he refused to back down and followed a scorched earth policy on his own people and country.

The question is irrelevant now from our perspective.

The fact is they are there getting bigger and bigger to the point where
they even have their own oil wells. :D

We should do nothing to enhance them.

piece-itpete
09-04-2013, 11:47 AM
It's an old vs new look at the status quo I think. Old realpolitik says better a brutal strongman than home grown morons. New says bring 'the people' into power and work with them to control said morons.

I like the thought of the new, it's hard not to cheer for the people, but I have serious reservations.

It's something of a dead argument as much of the ME has already passed over to 'the people', at least theoretically. I have doubts that it will stay that way, and if so that the radicals will be suppressed. Look at Pakistan.

In the meantime, does the international community believe that genocide of sorts is acceptable to them, or not? NK at least is certainly watching.

Pete

piece-itpete
09-04-2013, 12:03 PM
Well the debate is over. A strike on Syria without UN approval IS a war crime.

Chomsky says so :)

"....[T]hat aggression without UN authorization would be a war crime, a very serious one, is quite clear, despite tortured efforts to invoke other crimes as precedents," he added. ..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/02/noam-chomsky-syria_n_3851911.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

We can all go home now lol.

Pete

Dondilion
09-04-2013, 12:20 PM
In the meantime, does the international community believe that genocide of sorts is acceptable to them, or not? NK at least is certainly watching.

Pete

Not every intervention makes sense in practical terms. Each situation has different matrix. We went into Somalia and had
to leave because the price, both human and material, to control the land was too high. A fail state ...their inter communal
violence seems to be just leveling.

We went into Lebanon and had to leave also.

As to Syria. To put things right we would have to go in and punch the Alawites, Christians, Shias and radical Islamists.
What a soup?

Are you suggesting that we should invade N. Korea if there is internal upheaval.

piece-itpete
09-04-2013, 12:53 PM
I'm still uncertain how far we want to go to stop things of this nature. The folks in charge have largely imposed something of an arbitrary setup on the world since WW2 but it grows like all things government.

Regardless, I have no doubt we'd go after Kim Jong Un, heck I suspect they are chomping at the bit to do so.

Pete

bobabode
09-04-2013, 02:23 PM
So the left is on board with bombing Syria all of a sudden?

Pete

In light of the latest evidence presented to congress? Most are on board, it appears. Lot's of neocons, too. CNN is broadcasting the house briefing being conducted by Kerry, Hagel, etc. Kind of strange to see the neocons beating up on the Benghazi screamers.;)

Zeke
09-04-2013, 02:42 PM
Basically, a no-win military situation has been turned into a win-win political one by el presidente.

BRILLIANT.

piece-itpete
09-04-2013, 02:51 PM
I thought you were against the bombing?

Bob, I think the left's coming online (most you'alls sure weren't a coupla days ago!) because failing in Congress would be the biggest failure of Obama's Presidency.

Just a guess ;)

Pete

bobabode
09-04-2013, 02:52 PM
Duncan (S.C.-TP) was in full throated OCD whine about Benghazi, IRS, NSA and Area 51 lil' green aliens. Everything except Syria. I can't believe such people actually get elected to the house but then he's from So. Carolina.:rolleyes:

bobabode
09-04-2013, 02:55 PM
I thought you were against the bombing?

Bob, I think the left's coming online (most you'alls sure weren't a coupla days ago!) because failing in Congress would be the biggest failure of Obama's Presidency.

Just a guess ;)

Pete

Are you eight years old? ;)

piece-itpete
09-04-2013, 03:01 PM
A few years back ;)

Pete

whell
09-04-2013, 03:25 PM
As to Syria. To put things right we would have to go in and punch the Alawites, Christians, Shias and radical Islamists.
What a soup?


Do we really think the Christians, Shias and Alawites want the radical islamists hanging around?

The Shias hate the Alawites because the Alawites are the ruling class while also being in the minority. The strongman tactics in Syria grew up around keeping the minority in power. I don't think anyone there would mourn that group getting its card punched.

That might make the soup a bit less murky.

Dondilion
09-04-2013, 03:29 PM
According to BBC: the Jihadists are extremely wary.....they believe
they are the real target of proposed US attack. :D

http//:www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23933681

piece-itpete
09-04-2013, 03:34 PM
Maybe we'll 'accidently' hit them :D

Pete

icenine
09-04-2013, 03:36 PM
Do we really think the Christians, Shias and Alawites want the radical islamists hanging around?

The Shias hate the Alawites because the Alawites are the ruling class while also being in the minority. The strongman tactics in Syria grew up around keeping the minority in power. I don't think anyone there would mourn that group getting its card punched.

That might make the soup a bit less murky.

I think you mean Sunnis instead of Shias...the Alawites are a Shia sect.
That is one reason why Saudi Arabia is supporting the primairily Sunni rebels.
But your point about getting their card punched is right on.

bobabode
09-04-2013, 03:42 PM
I thought you were against the bombing?

Bob, I think the left's coming online (most you'alls sure weren't a coupla days ago!) because failing in Congress would be the biggest failure of Obama's Presidency.

Just a guess ;)

Pete

I think you're dreaming but don't let me stop you, Pete.:rolleyes: See bolded...If the House kills the response to Assad using Sarin gas on civilians? The blowback will hurt the tea besodden in the upcoming elections.

Like I said before, once the evidence is in, let the President make his case for military action before congress. Now that the evidence is here, I support the CINCs decision with that qualifier. I don't believe that in this case he has the power to sidestep the War Powers Act. The Senate commitee has approved their version and will vote next week. My sweaty crystal ball say they will approve it, bipartisanly (sic). The (fun) House will also approve, somehow, I think, maybe.:rolleyes:

That added side benefit here is that the Teabagger caucus has to shit or get off the pot. Already, Rubio has killed any chance of a credible run for the White House in '16. Paul buried himself further, (if that's even possible).

Dondilion
09-04-2013, 03:52 PM
Do we really think the Christians, Shias and Alawites want the radical islamists hanging around?

The Shias hate the Alawites because the Alawites are the ruling class while also being in the minority. The strongman tactics in Syria grew up around keeping the minority in power. I don't think anyone there would mourn that group getting its card punched.

That might make the soup a bit less murky.

As things stand now Christians and Shias have a larger fear of the Jihadists and are therefore giving support to Assad. The Sunni Jihadists are waging a wide ranging war against all the Shias both in Iraq and in Syria.

Right now they are bombing Shia controlled Iraq back to the stone age. Their objective is to establish a caliphate, free of all Shias, Christians Alawites and other infidels.

Dondilion
09-04-2013, 04:01 PM
Maybe we'll 'accidently' hit them :D

Pete

I like that one Pete.

I burst out laughing and my wife looks at me with a question sign....Is
he getting crazy?

BlueStreak
09-04-2013, 04:09 PM
All of this soupy mess of Sunni vs. Shia vs. Alawites vs. Christians vs. Jihadist this, that and the other whackjob that's hated the rest of them and they all hate us and the Jews for the last 800 years is precisely why we should just forget the whole damn thing.

If we let them suck us into their lunacy we are no better than they are.

Dave

bobabode
09-04-2013, 04:11 PM
I like that one Pete.

I burst out laughing and my wife looks at me with a question sign....Is
he getting crazy?

I get the same from mine, Don. ;)

Twodogs
09-04-2013, 07:31 PM
All of this soupy mess of Sunni vs. Shia vs. Alawites vs. Christians vs. Jihadist this, that and the other whackjob that's hated the rest of them and they all hate us and the Jews for the last 800 years is precisely why we should just forget the whole damn thing.

If we let them suck us into their lunacy we are no better than they are.

Dave

Couldn't agree more, and we are definitely in the majority here. I think if we do anything at all, let's parachute drop guns, grenades, and bullets to both sides.

BTW, did you guys see Obama on the TV today? He says he didn't draw a red line, the world did. I have to admit that he is entertaining at times.:D

bobabode
09-04-2013, 07:48 PM
Couldn't agree more, and we are definitely in the majority here. I think if we do anything at all, let's parachute drop guns, grenades, and bullets to both sides.

BTW, did you guys see Obama on the TV today? He says he didn't draw a red line, the world did. I have to admit that he is entertaining at times.:D

Look here, Jay. There's some truth to what he says.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Protocol_on_the_use_of_Asphyxiating_and_Poi sonous_Gases

Zeke
09-04-2013, 08:08 PM
BTW, did you guys see Obama on the TV today? He says he didn't draw a red line, the world did. I have to admit that he is entertaining at times.:D

Particularly when he's right.

bobabode
09-04-2013, 08:59 PM
Anyone else catch Putin's response when pressed last night? Seems the ol' KGB dude may see his way yet to U.N. sanctions with teeth.

I'm still against this rush to judgement of the cruise missle type. I would much prefer having Bashir Assad hauled up in front of the World Court at The Hague on war crimes charges.

piece-itpete
09-05-2013, 10:40 AM
Don, LOL!

All of this soupy mess of Sunni vs. Shia vs. Alawites vs. Christians vs. Jihadist this, that and the other whackjob that's hated the rest of them and they all hate us and the Jews for the last 800 years is precisely why we should just forget the whole damn thing.

If we let them suck us into their lunacy we are no better than they are.

Dave

"Oh, the Protestants hate the Catholics,
And the Catholics hate the Protestants,
And the Hindus hate the Muslims,
And everybody hates the Jews."

;)

Pete

piece-itpete
09-05-2013, 11:15 AM
I'm curious - many were happy when the British parliament voted against a punitive strike in Syria. Will there be the same response if Obie loses?

Pete

merrylander
09-05-2013, 11:39 AM
I'm curious - many were happy when the British parliament voted against a punitive strike in Syria. Will there be the same response if Obie loses?

Pete

Just so no talking head says we are "war weary" cause if I hear that horse hockey one more time I will scream.

The only people here who have a right to be war weary are the one who fought them. The rest of the general public only knew there was a war on is because they saw it on CNN.

No taxes were raised, it was run on the credit card - our grandchildren will pay for it.

No rationing, no doing without - Heck Shrub said go out and shop.:rolleyes:

BlueStreak
09-05-2013, 03:35 PM
I'm curious - many were happy when the British parliament voted against a punitive strike in Syria. Will there be the same response if Obie loses?

Pete

Yeah. I'll be happy. You can pretty much bank on that.

I may hate the way some people will simply use it to bash him, whilst conveniently ignoring the complicity of the GOP leadership. But I truly do oppose the basic premise. It's a stupid excuse to go to war.

Dave

BlueStreak
09-05-2013, 03:37 PM
Just so no talking head says we are "war weary" cause if I hear that horse hockey one more time I will scream.

The only people here who have a right to be war weary are the one who fought them. The rest of the general public only knew there was a war on is because they saw it on CNN.

No taxes were raised, it was run on the credit card - our grandchildren will pay for it.

No rationing, no doing without - Heck Shrub said go out and shop.:rolleyes:

+1.

Dave

Twodogs
09-05-2013, 04:12 PM
Couldn't agree more, and we are definitely in the majority here. I think if we do anything at all, let's parachute drop guns, grenades, and bullets to both sides.

:D

Now here's a step in the right direction. NSFW
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/world/middleeast/brutality-of-syrian-rebels-pose-dilemma-in-west.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

bobabode
09-05-2013, 05:35 PM
War is hell on earth. I wonder how many Silkworms Assad has in his arsenal?

Twodogs
09-05-2013, 05:48 PM
Dunno, but this plot against Obama is getting bigger. Now youtube is in on it. They have doctored tape I guess because they show him saying the redline comment not once, but twice. :eek:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avQKLRGRhPU

Twodogs
09-05-2013, 05:57 PM
War is hell on earth. I wonder how many Silkworms Assad has in his arsenal?

He does "act" like he's got a few aces up his sleeve don't he? He seems pretty lucid too, not Hitlerish at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pInIvC7NZ_A

bobabode
09-05-2013, 06:06 PM
I've been reading up on Syria. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syria

Worth a look, imo.

bobabode
09-05-2013, 06:12 PM
Dunno, but this plot against Obama is getting bigger. Now youtube is in on it. They have doctored tape I guess because they show him saying the redline comment not once, but twice. :eek:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avQKLRGRhPU

Meh, reminds me of lines in the sand empty rhetoric employed by Gee Dubya and his cronies. What do you think about Obama asking for a congressional approval before cruise missiling this asshole?

If for nothing else it shows how full of shit Rand Paul and the rest of the Teasipper caucus is, imho.;)

Twodogs
09-05-2013, 07:39 PM
Meh, reminds me of lines in the sand empty rhetoric employed by Gee Dubya and his cronies. What do you think about Obama asking for a congressional approval before cruise missiling this asshole?

If for nothing else it shows how full of shit Rand Paul and the rest of the Teasipper caucus is, imho.;)

He's asking congress for a scapegoat if shit goes wrong. Then if it goes wrong they will point to the Rs that voted to give him the power. I didn't have to go to Lincoln High school to figure that out.

What I find odd about Syria from that excellent wiki page, is that there were no (not a one) Christians there in 10,000 BC. :confused:

whell
09-05-2013, 07:44 PM
Meh, reminds me of lines in the sand empty rhetoric employed by Gee Dubya and his cronies. What do you think about Obama asking for a congressional approval before cruise missiling this asshole?

If for nothing else it shows how full of shit Rand Paul and the rest of the Teasipper caucus is, imho.;)

BS. The Prez doesn't even have support from his own party on this. It ain't always about the Tea Party, Bob.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/05/pelosi-not-sure-house-democrats-will-back-syria-resolution/

Twodogs
09-05-2013, 07:59 PM
BS. The Prez doesn't even have support from his own party on this. It ain't always about the Tea Party, Bob.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/05/pelosi-not-sure-house-democrats-will-back-syria-resolution/

and the plan comes together perfectly. This stuff don't happen by accident. Whatever happens bad will be the Rs fault and whatever happens good will be due to the Ds lust for freedom and compassion. Same old saw.

bobabode
09-05-2013, 08:28 PM
BS. The Prez doesn't even have support from his own party on this. It ain't always about the Tea Party, Bob.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/05/pelosi-not-sure-house-democrats-will-back-syria-resolution/


Counting your chickens before they hatch, eh Mike?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/where-lawmakers-stand-on-syria/

bobabode
09-05-2013, 08:50 PM
He's asking congress for a scapegoat if shit goes wrong. Then if it goes wrong they will point to the Rs that voted to give him the power.

Sounds exactly like Iraq.:rolleyes:

Charles
09-05-2013, 08:53 PM
and the plan comes together perfectly. This stuff don't happen by accident. Whatever happens bad will be the Rs fault and whatever happens good will be due to the Ds lust for freedom and compassion. Same old saw.

It appears to me to be politics as usual.

I'm still waiting for someone to articulate a reason for the necessity of doing something now, what our plan of action might entail, and more importantly, what the expected outcome will be.

So far, the reasons for intervention seem to be based on the domino theory with a healthy dose of emotionalism thrown it. While I can appreciate allowing our response to remain fluid, I would definitely expect an answer as to how this is going to improve the situation in the Middle East. Especially, how this will improve the situation for the United States, since we're the one's who are going to do it.

From past experiences, if someone can't give you a good reason for doing something, they either don't have one, or if they told you, they wouldn't have any support.

Which leads me to suspect that our betters master plan is so unpopular that they can't expose it, or they truly are group of imbeciles playing checkers with a chess board.

Chas

bobabode
09-05-2013, 09:05 PM
We'll have to wait and see as to how congress votes.

Should we wait until Assad Scuds israel with Sarin?

finnbow
09-05-2013, 09:20 PM
We'll have to wait and see as to how congress votes.

Should we wait until Assad Scuds israel with Sarin?

He knows that would be his death sentence at the hands of the Israelis. Believe it or not, Israel wants him to remain in power. Better the devil you know than the one you don't.

Oerets
09-05-2013, 09:30 PM
I'm sorry but just why with all the atrocities happening in the world over the years is this one needing the US to police? I say let some other countries put up some of their skin in this game. Hell Turkey alone could take care of this one. But why should they? Let the good old USA send millions of dollars of cruse missiles to hit targets long emptied of anything worth destroying. The US Russia and all the major players do not want Syria to overthrow Assad. They just what him to behave. Have no clue on how to do it and he knows it!

This is all about playing to the news cycle and selling weapons, the the poor people suffering now.



Barney

bobabode
09-05-2013, 09:32 PM
He knows that would be his death sentence at the hands of the Israelis. Believe it or not, Israel wants him to remain in power. Better the devil you know than the one you don't.

I heard that there was a run on gas masks in Israel. Could be the Patriot/Iron Dome isn't impenetrable.

finnbow
09-05-2013, 09:34 PM
I heard that there was a run on gas masks in Israel. Could be the Patriot/Iron Dome isn't impenetrable.

Yep. The government is handing them out. My son's back in Germany this week, but I wouldn't really be too concerned anyway. Hell, my wife and I are planning on spending nearly 3 weeks in Israel (and maybe Jordan) in November.

Charles
09-05-2013, 09:41 PM
Sounds exactly like Iraq.:rolleyes:

It sounds similar to Iraq.

Only Shrub had congress on board (whether they liked it or not), could make a case under international law for the invasion, had a coalition of nations on board (whether they like it or not), and placed American forces in a strategic location where we could influence not only Iran, Syria, but Saudi Arabia as well.

And that was ten years ago. Perhaps an overly ambitious plan, Iraq was abandoned by the Obama administration after it was finally stabilized, which begs the question as to was Iraq a failure, or did it fail because we refused to follow through?

After which, the Obama administration, by "leading from behind", has not only destabilized Libya and Egypt, but by wishing to intervene in Syria, has created the possibility of destabilizing the entire Middle East. If anyone can advance a reason for the wisdom of returning to "the graveyard of empires", I would like to hear it.

If what I've read is correct, Saudi Arabia is offering to pick up the tab for us once again to "fight to the last American" while courting Russia as well. Perhaps we should have just stayed in Iraq, where we had the Saudi's by the short hairs, and they knew it.

Anyway, we've fucked around over there for ten years, and things keep getting worse. I hate to say it, but the only way you win a war is to be so brutal that your opponent is not only unable to continue the fight, but has no will to continue the fight.

Whatever we've been doing for the last ten years, we've been doing it wrong. If we can't wrap it up, let's pack up our shit and come home.

Chas

Charles
09-05-2013, 09:44 PM
He knows that would be his death sentence at the hands of the Israelis. Believe it or not, Israel wants him to remain in power. Better the devil you know than the one you don't.

That I believe.

Chas

bobabode
09-05-2013, 09:51 PM
It sounds similar to Iraq.

Only Shrub had congress on board (whether they liked it or not), could make a case under international law for the invasion, had a coalition of nations on board (whether they like it or not), and placed American forces in a strategic location where we could influence not only Iran, Syria, but Saudi Arabia as well.

And that was ten years ago. Perhaps an overly ambitious plan, Iraq was abandoned by the Obama administration after it was finally stabilized, which begs the question as to was Iraq a failure, or did it fail because we refused to follow through?

After which, the Obama administration, by "leading from behind", has not only destabilized Libya and Egypt, but by wishing to intervene in Syria, has created the possibility of destabilizing the entire Middle East. If anyone can advance a reason for the wisdom of returning to "the graveyard of empires", I would like to hear it.

If what I've read is correct, Saudi Arabia is offering to pick up the tab for us once again to "fight to the last American" while courting Russia as well. Perhaps we should have just stayed in Iraq, where we had the Saudi's by the short hairs, and they knew it.

Anyway, we've fucked around over there for ten years, and things keep getting worse. I hate to say it, but the only way you win a war is to be so brutal that your opponent is not only unable to continue the fight, but has no will to continue the fight.

Whatever we've been doing for the last ten years, we've been doing it wrong. If we can't wrap it up, let's pack up our shit and come home.

Chas

You must've missed the sarcastic smiley, Chas. Interesting narrative, tho.:rolleyes:

icenine
09-05-2013, 09:59 PM
You are forgetting the Bush was wrong on the intelligence about WMDs in Iraq, which is charitable on my part because many others think his administration lied about them. At least Obama is relying on correct intelligence in this case.

Sure is taking a long time for the UN to release the results of their study....I am sure if there had been no evidence they would have told everyone by now. They are just sitting on what everyone else knows.

Anyway I do not think Obama will get the votes so everybody quit worrying about our assault on the beaches of Syria. Won't happen.

bobabode
09-05-2013, 10:02 PM
Yep. The government is handing them out. My son's back in Germany this week, but I wouldn't really be too concerned anyway. Hell, my wife and I are planning on spending nearly 3 weeks in Israel (and maybe Jordan) in November.

In case anyone hasn't noticed, I'm all for waiting until the U.N. inspectors report is in and the U.N. votes at that point before doing anything. Maybe in the meantime he'll mess with Turkey again and it'll be a NATO problem instead.;)

I hope you have a nice vacation, Pat. Going to Petra?

Charles
09-05-2013, 10:12 PM
You are forgetting the Bush was wrong on the intelligence about WMDs in Iraq, which is charitable on my part because many others think his administration lied about them. At least Obama is relying on correct intelligence in this case.

Sure is taking a long time for the UN to release the results of their study....I am sure if there had been no evidence they would have told everyone by now. They are just sitting on what everyone else knows.

Anyway I do not think Obama will get the votes so everybody quit worrying about our assault on the beaches of Syria. Won't happen.

Hate to say it, but whenever it comes to politics, I don't believe a damn word from most any of them.

Chas

icenine
09-05-2013, 10:15 PM
Why did Ronald Reagan not get impeached for selling missiles to Iran not six years after the end of the hostage crisis....who did Iran use those missiles on I wonder?

And everyone is upset about Obama asking Congress for a vote.

Worst Presidents since Nixon? Bush II and Reagan easy easy choice. I would just add that just because you look like John Wayne and fit in at country club does not mean you can be a good President.

icenine
09-05-2013, 10:17 PM
Hate to say it, but whenever it comes to politics, I don't believe a damn word from most any of them.

Chas

You believe somebody because otherwise you would not waste your time arguing with me.....and the word fool is not in this sentence...well not really;)

Charles
09-05-2013, 10:26 PM
Yep. The government is handing them out. My son's back in Germany this week, but I wouldn't really be too concerned anyway. Hell, my wife and I are planning on spending nearly 3 weeks in Israel (and maybe Jordan) in November.

Enjoy yourself, it would be like pulling teeth for me.

Besides, I have my own concerns. I think my wife still wants to drag my ass to Grease.

Chas

Charles
09-05-2013, 10:30 PM
You believe somebody because otherwise you would not waste your time arguing with me.....and the word fool is not in this sentence...well not really;)

At least you put up a better argument than my dog, which is about the only other option I have at the moment.

Like I said, I view this as a cyber beer joint. A place to have a few and engage in mindless banter of no consequence.

Chas

whell
09-06-2013, 09:42 AM
Counting your chickens before they hatch, eh Mike?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/where-lawmakers-stand-on-syria/

I can count, and I can read. Right now it looks like fully 1/3 of the Dem caucus isn't on board with military action.

piece-itpete
09-06-2013, 10:34 AM
At least you put up a better argument than my dog

That would make a GREAT tag line.

Pete

bobabode
09-06-2013, 04:01 PM
That would make a GREAT tag line.

Pete

It's even more impressive in Latin.;)

"Argumentum certe melius quam ferre canis"

bobabode
09-06-2013, 04:02 PM
I can count, and I can read.

Whoopeeee.:p This guy makes some good points.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/09/05/why-house-dems-think-syria-resolution-could-still-pass/?hpid=z3

BlueStreak
09-06-2013, 04:17 PM
After which, the Obama administration, by "leading from behind", has not only destabilized Libya and Egypt, but by wishing to intervene in Syria, has created the possibility of destabilizing the entire Middle East. If anyone can advance a reason for the wisdom of returning to "the graveyard of empires", I would like to hear it.

If what I've read is correct, Saudi Arabia is offering to pick up the tab for us once again to "fight to the last American" while courting Russia as well. Perhaps we should have just stayed in Iraq, where we had the Saudi's by the short hairs, and they knew it.

Anyway, we've fucked around over there for ten years, and things keep getting worse. I hate to say it, but the only way you win a war is to be so brutal that your opponent is not only unable to continue the fight, but has no will to continue the fight.

Whatever we've been doing for the last ten years, we've been doing it wrong. If we can't wrap it up, let's pack up our shit and come home.

Chas

Other than your point about Iraq, which I see as having been a waste of lives, time and resources as well, I see we are in concurrence on this issue.

We need to start fighting wars to win.....or not fight them at all.

Dave

Rex E.
09-06-2013, 08:31 PM
Other than your point about Iraq, which I see as having been a waste of lives, time and resources as well, I see we are in concurrence on this issue.

We need to start fighting wars to win.....or not fight them at all.

Dave

What does "fight to win" mean though? I think it's imperialism and I'm fine with it. If we are gonna fight for it, spend lives and treasure then we should keep it. Not hand it back in a few years but keep it for good. If the goal is not to keep the territory for good then we should not be involved in a "boots on the ground, planes & missiles in the air" kinda way, imo.

Dondilion
09-06-2013, 09:46 PM
What does "fight to win" mean though? I think it's imperialism and I'm fine with it. If we are gonna fight for it, spend lives and treasure then we should keep it. Not hand it back in a few years but keep it for good. If the goal is not to keep the territory for good then we should not be involved in a "boots on the ground, planes & missiles in the air" kinda way, imo.

Very forthright. Reads like the Israeli right wing.

There was also a time when we did not give back territory. Then we
found out that it was more cost effective to bring countries within
our sphere of influence using surrogates and or our CIA.

Rex E.
09-06-2013, 10:28 PM
Very forthright. Reads like the Israeli right wing.

There was also a time when we did not give back territory. Then we
found out that it was more cost effective to bring countries within
our sphere of influence using surrogates and or our CIA.

That's not been working very well either. No sense in fighting for something you have no intentions of keeping. If we have no intentions of keeping anything then we won't be fighting.

Charles
09-06-2013, 10:46 PM
Other than your point about Iraq, which I see as having been a waste of lives, time and resources as well, I see we are in concurrence on this issue.

We need to start fighting wars to win.....or not fight them at all.

Dave

I'm speculating on Iraq, my point being that since we didn't follow through, we have to idea as to whether it could have been effective or not.

I had certain reservations about our invasion in Iraq, for no other reason than Machiavelli's statement...and I won't get it correct..."There is nothing more difficult, or dangerous, or more unsure of success, than to attempt to change the nature of things."

Don't ask me as to what the course of action should have been. But, IMHO, our current course of action is beginning to look like a failure.

I still believe that if you're going to war, you need to be prepared to grind your opponent under the heel of you boot. Anything less is ineffective, and unfair to those who are sent to fight our battles.

If you're going to send people out there to die for you, you at least owe them the option of winning.

We're not engaged in war, we're engaged in politics and money...and it stinks like shit.

That's because it is shit.

Chas

icenine
09-06-2013, 11:12 PM
What does "fight to win" mean though? I think it's imperialism and I'm fine with it. If we are gonna fight for it, spend lives and treasure then we should keep it. Not hand it back in a few years but keep it for good. If the goal is not to keep the territory for good then we should not be involved in a "boots on the ground, planes & missiles in the air" kinda way, imo.

boy you sound sort of like an Imperialist

"Rex of the Raj" lol

get out your Kipling

Rex E.
09-06-2013, 11:53 PM
boy you sound sort of like an Imperialist

"Rex of the Raj" lol

get out your Kipling

Yeah, I knew that was coming but be honest with yourself. What is the point just running around the world killing your own and others. Wouldn't it be better just to not do that?


I know, I know, I know, Imperialist..Isolationist......make up my mind. I see it as neither, just being practical.

When I used to hunt I didn't just kill a deer and walk away from it. That would make no sense. I killed the deer then brought home the meat to the family.

mpholland
09-07-2013, 09:41 AM
If you think things are fucked up over there now, just think what it would be like if Iraq was an American republic.

finnbow
09-07-2013, 11:22 AM
Other than your point about Iraq, which I see as having been a waste of lives, time and resources as well, I see we are in concurrence on this issue.

We need to start fighting wars to win.....or not fight them at all.

Dave

We haven't really fought to win since WWII.

What does "fight to win" mean though? I think it's imperialism and I'm fine with it. If we are gonna fight for it, spend lives and treasure then we should keep it. Not hand it back in a few years but keep it for good. If the goal is not to keep the territory for good then we should not be involved in a "boots on the ground, planes & missiles in the air" kinda way, imo.

We haven't fought for or kept territory since we contrived the Spanish-American War for that very purpose.

BlueStreak
09-07-2013, 02:20 PM
I'm speculating on Iraq, my point being that since we didn't follow through, we have to idea as to whether it could have been effective or not.

I had certain reservations about our invasion in Iraq, for no other reason than Machiavelli's statement...and I won't get it correct..."There is nothing more difficult, or dangerous, or more unsure of success, than to attempt to change the nature of things."

Don't ask me as to what the course of action should have been. But, IMHO, our current course of action is beginning to look like a failure.

I still believe that if you're going to war, you need to be prepared to grind your opponent under the heel of you boot. Anything less is ineffective, and unfair to those who are sent to fight our battles.

If you're going to send people out there to die for you, you at least owe them the option of winning.

We're not engaged in war, we're engaged in politics and money...and it stinks like shit.

That's because it is shit.

Chas

I still maintain that Iraq was nothing but money and politics and stunk like shit. As the first Gulf War stunk like shit and Vietnam and Korea stunk like shit. I believe this to be no better or worse. Business as usual for the MIC.......and there is no stinkier shit than that.

Dave

bobabode
09-07-2013, 03:49 PM
I still maintain that Iraq was nothing but money and politics and stunk like shit. As the first Gulf War stunk like shit and Vietnam and Korea stunk like shit. I believe this to be no better or worse. Business as usual for the MIC.......and there is no stinkier shit than that.

Dave

Yep.

This whole thing stinks of a set up now that the neocons like the ones over at the Wall Street Urinal and the one's at the Washington Post are waving the red cape of Iran in front of the bull since there isn't sufficient outrage over the Syrians massacring there own people in their own civil war. Unless and until someone actually attacks us we need to stand down.
Let the U.N. and the World Court deal with this shit, that's what they are for.

Dondilion
09-07-2013, 08:50 PM
Yep.

This whole thing stinks of a set up now that the neocons like the ones over at the Wall Street Urinal and the one's at the Washington Post are waving the red cape of Iran in front of the bull since there isn't sufficient outrage over the Syrians massacring there own people in their own civil war. Unless and until someone actually attacks us we need to stand down.
Let the U.N. and the World Court deal with this shit, that's what they are for.

I detect that long ago. The neocons and their allies see Syria as
a propaganda tool to get at Iran their main target.

One should view with deep skepticism whatever "evidence" they are projecting.

Once again these are trying to bamboozle an unwilling American
public into a major conflagration.

icenine
09-07-2013, 09:04 PM
http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-syria-strikes-20130908,0,6708714.story


interesting article. I think Obama is going to launch missiles with or without Congress.
I am not thinking it will be as dramatic as a major conflagration. Time will tell.

whell
09-08-2013, 08:09 AM
Here's something that will further muddy the waters:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/08/us-syria-crisis-germany-idUSBRE98707B20130908?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=992637

"Syrian government forces may have carried out a chemical weapons attack close to Damascus without the personal permission of President Bashar al-Assad, Germany's Bild am Sonntag paper reported on Sunday, citing German intelligence."

whell
09-08-2013, 08:10 AM
Yep.

This whole thing stinks of a set up now that the neocons like the ones over at the Wall Street Urinal and the one's at the Washington Post are waving the red cape of Iran in front of the bull since there isn't sufficient outrage over the Syrians massacring there own people in their own civil war. Unless and until someone actually attacks us we need to stand down.
Let the U.N. and the World Court deal with this shit, that's what they are for.

Or, maybe Obama is making it part of HIS plan to do that.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/176040/obamas-syria-war-really-about-iran-and-israel#

BlueStreak
09-08-2013, 09:41 AM
Here's something that will further muddy the waters:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/08/us-syria-crisis-germany-idUSBRE98707B20130908?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=992637

"Syrian government forces may have carried out a chemical weapons attack close to Damascus without the personal permission of President Bashar al-Assad, Germany's Bild am Sonntag paper reported on Sunday, citing German intelligence."

Just as in any country, even here, the official government of that country is supposed to be responsible for whatever goes on inside their borders, especially the actions of the military under their charge.

But, when it comes right down to it, we all know how well politicians accept responsibility.

Dave

Rex E.
09-08-2013, 10:46 AM
Here's something that will further muddy the waters:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/08/us-syria-crisis-germany-idUSBRE98707B20130908?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=992637

"Syrian government forces may have carried out a chemical weapons attack close to Damascus without the personal permission of President Bashar al-Assad, Germany's Bild am Sonntag paper reported on Sunday, citing German intelligence."

"German Chancellor Angela Merkel repeated in an interview with Bild am Sonntag that Germany would not take part in any military intervention but that the use of chemical weapons should not go without response."

Classic, "something needs done but we won't do it" :rolleyes:

Rex E.
09-08-2013, 10:52 AM
Or, maybe Obama is making it part of HIS plan to do that.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/176040/obamas-syria-war-really-about-iran-and-israel#

Time to let Israel lead on this. Hell, let them attack Iran directly and get it over with.

This stuff is just silly, why are not the Israelis taking care of their neighborhood?

mpholland
09-08-2013, 10:55 AM
Time to let Israel lead on this. Hell, let them attack Iran directly and get it over with.

This stuff is just silly, why are not the Israelis taking care of their neighborhood?

Why do for yourself when others will do it for you? Actually, I don't think they would have too much issue attacking Iran. IIRC our current administration has been advising them to hold off.

BlueStreak
09-08-2013, 11:09 AM
"German Chancellor Angela Merkel repeated in an interview with Bild am Sonntag that Germany would not take part in any military intervention but that the use of chemical weapons should not go without response."

Classic, "something needs done but we won't do it" :rolleyes:

Right. Let the big, dumb American do it. He loves it. It makes him feel all manly and patriotic-n-shit. Spend a trillion dollars, then smoke'em if you can still afford them.

Where does it end?

Dave

Rex E.
09-08-2013, 11:12 AM
Why do for yourself when others will do it for you? Actually, I don't think they would have too much issue attacking Iran. IIRC our current administration has been advising them to hold off.

It's not just the current admin. Pretty much every admin I can remember.

Time to remove ourselves from their affairs and see what transpires. We'll know if we are needed.

icenine
09-08-2013, 12:16 PM
Be careful Mike the Nation may cause you to hang out with the wrong crowd.;)

icenine
09-08-2013, 12:19 PM
http://beta.syriadeeply.org/

I am just posting this since I saw one of the site's representatives on MSNBC this am.
Presents the rebel point of view I think.

Dondilion
09-08-2013, 06:48 PM
http://beta.syriadeeply.org/

I am just posting this since I saw one of the site's representatives on MSNBC this am.
Presents the rebel point of view I think.

One of the articles: THE STATE OF SECULAR REBEL FIGHTING FORCE

The secular rebel is lamenting the fact that the Jihadists are better
financed and armed.

Of course they are because they are financed by the Wahabis of Saudi Arabia whom
we wholeheartedly protect. :D


Now this secular rebel wants our money and our arms. Now how can we
be sure that this guy is not a front for jihadists or just simply a hustler?

The only safe answer is for us to bear our own arms, which implies boots
on the ground. :D

Syria is a maze of confusion for us.

bobabode
09-08-2013, 07:04 PM
I hear ya, Don but the only boots on the ground need to be wearing blue helmets.;)

icenine
09-08-2013, 07:18 PM
One of the articles: THE STATE OF SECULAR REBEL FIGHTING FORCE

The secular rebel is lamenting the fact that the Jihadists are better
financed and armed.

Of course they are because they are financed by the Wahabis of Saudi Arabia whom
we wholeheartedly protect. :D


Now this secular rebel wants our money and our arms. Now how can we
be sure that this guy is not a front for jihadists or just simply a hustler?

The only safe answer is for us to bear our own arms, which implies boots
on the ground. :D

Syria is a maze of confusion for us.

my objective is knowledge

Dondilion
09-08-2013, 07:45 PM
I hear ya, Don but the only boots on the ground need to be wearing blue helmets.;)

Another article from the same link ---- HANGOUT.

This is really an interview. The analysis here is super.

the analyst says it would take 200,000 to 200,500 blue helmets
to fix Syria. :eek:

bobabode
09-08-2013, 07:51 PM
Another article from the same link ---- HANGOUT.

This is really an interview. The analysis here is super.

the analyst says it would take 200,000 to 200,500 blue helmets
to fix Syria. :eek:

Yep, it ain't Kosovo.

Dondilion
09-08-2013, 07:55 PM
Yep, it ain't Kosovo.

My error. He states several hundred thousands.

the 200-250 t was what one of our general had recommended for Iraq.

The HANGOUT should be read by anyone interested in this Syrian maze.

BlueStreak
09-08-2013, 07:59 PM
No matter who we back, we are backing the bad guys. The whole damned thing is a sinister carnival of dysfunction. IF OUR PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS THINK THEY ARE GOING TO FIX IT WITH A TOMAHAWK MISSLE, THEY ARE EVEN MORE STUPID THAN I FEARED THEY ARE.

hillbilly
09-08-2013, 09:36 PM
No matter who we back, we are backing the bad guys. The whole damned thing is a sinister carnival of dysfunction. IF OUR PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS THINK THEY ARE GOING TO FIX IT WITH A TOMAHAWK MISSLE, THEY ARE EVEN MORE STUPID THAN I FEARED THEY ARE.

Dave, you know what else chaps my ass badly? The fact we always rebuild shit after we blow it up. I wish we'd stay out of other peoples business unless they hit us first, then after we hit back let THEM rebuild their own damage.

bobabode
09-08-2013, 10:04 PM
Dave, you know what else chaps my ass badly? The fact we always rebuild shit after we blow it up. I wish we'd stay out of other peoples business unless they hit us first, then after we hit back let THEM rebuild their own damage.

Yeh, the Marshall Plan sure backfired on us....:rolleyes: Nothing but Audi's, VW's and Mitsubishi's on the road around here.:D

whell
09-08-2013, 10:16 PM
IF OUR PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS THINK THEY ARE GOING TO FIX IT WITH A TOMAHAWK MISSLE, THEY ARE EVEN MORE STUPID THAN I FEARED THEY ARE.

You're getting warm! :)

icenine
09-08-2013, 10:19 PM
I am pretty sure Iraq has not been rebuilt by us yet.

bobabode
09-08-2013, 11:24 PM
Watching The Bill Moyers Show. Andrew Bacevich is making a lot of sense. Here's a link.
http://billmoyers.com/segment/andrew-bacevich-on-taking-action-in-syria/


More...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Bacevich

bobabode
09-09-2013, 01:21 AM
Want to really help Syrians? Try this....

http://donate.unhcr.org/syria?utm_source=website-news-rh-button&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=SyriaCrisis

Dondilion
09-09-2013, 09:46 AM
Watching The Bill Moyers Show. Andrew Bacevich is making a lot of sense. Here's a link.
http://billmoyers.com/segment/andrew-bacevich-on-taking-action-in-syria/



Thanks Bob!

Excellent! Bacevich and I are on the same page with many observations.

"The American military, especially the Army and the United Marine Corps,
has been abused."

I remembered Marines were sent into Fallujah (2nd battle), Iraq, to engage in close quarter combat and clear out insurgents.
I then remarked what a waste of the flower of our youth. We told the insurgents when we were coming and they had enough
time to prepare all sorts of nasty stuff for the Marines.

Now the civilian population had fled the city. We went in and cleared the
city at great cost to the marines. Later when we left the insurgents
re-occupied the city. :D

This particular folly was later brought home and enlarged to me when I met In Queens, NY, a Marine who survived that particular engagement.

Bacevich: Mostly what we do militarily in ME region is not particularly
relevant to what's unfolding on the ground.


The attached picture relates to 2nd battle of Fallujah.

piece-itpete
09-09-2013, 09:50 AM
...

I still believe that if you're going to war, you need to be prepared to grind your opponent under the heel of you boot. Anything less is ineffective, and unfair to those who are sent to fight our battles.

If you're going to send people out there to die for you, you at least owe them the option of winning.

....

Agreed.

Yep.

This whole thing stinks of a set up now that the neocons like the ones over at the Wall Street Urinal and the one's at the Washington Post are waving the red cape of Iran in front of the bull since there isn't sufficient outrage over the Syrians massacring there own people in their own civil war. Unless and until someone actually attacks us we need to stand down.
Let the U.N. and the World Court deal with this shit, that's what they are for.

Yep, Obie has nothing to do with it.


I am pretty sure Iraq has not been rebuilt by us yet.

They kicked us out.

Pete

BlueStreak
09-09-2013, 11:41 AM
Bob, Pete.....................

In case neither of you have noticed, both Democratic and Republican leaders are pushing for this......And pushing hard.

A pox on both houses.

Dave

BlueStreak
09-09-2013, 11:44 AM
They kicked us out.

Pete

We had no good reason to be there in the first place, just as we have no good reason to get involved in Syria..................

Dave

BlueStreak
09-09-2013, 11:51 AM
Thanks Bob!

Excellent! Bacevich and I are on the same page with many observations.

"The American military, especially the Army and the United Marine Corps,
has been abused."

I remembered Marines were sent into Fallujah (2nd battle), Iraq, to engage in close quarter combat and clear out insurgents.
I then remarked what a waste of the flower of our youth. We told the insurgents when we were coming and they had enough
time to prepare all sorts of nasty stuff for the Marines.

Now the civilian population had fled the city. We went in and cleared the
city at great cost to the marines. Later when we left the insurgents
re-occupied the city. :D

This particular folly was later brought home and enlarged to me when I met In Queens, NY, a Marine who survived that particular engagement.

Bacevich: Mostly what we do militarily in ME region is not particularly
relevant to what's unfolding on the ground.


The attached picture relates to 2nd battle of Fallujah.

I concur as well.

It's disgusting how we have reduced our men and women in uniform to tools of politics and business. It's been going on far too long. One of the few things I can agree with Libertarians on.

Rajoo
09-09-2013, 12:14 PM
Syria says it ‘welcomes’ Russia proposal on chemical weapons
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/john-kerry-in-london-campaigns-for-world-to-support-military-strike-against-syria/2013/09/09/e8ad7a72-193d-11e3-80ac-96205cacb45a_story.html

Good if this works and help avoid another senseless military excursion, for that is all it ever will be. Hopefully this will give the congressional hawks time to pause and rethink our plans. Of course, one can never trust Putin and his intentions.

bobabode
09-09-2013, 12:34 PM
Bob, Pete.....................

In case neither of you have noticed, both Democratic and Republican leaders are pushing for this......And pushing hard.

A pox on both houses.

Dave

I've noticed, that's why I believe we need to stand down until when and if the Security Council decides to send in the Blue helmets. A unilateral decision, on our part, makes for a dangerous precedent and it's wrong. We need to be better than our past.

piece-itpete
09-09-2013, 12:36 PM
Russia, China = no UN action.

Pete

bobabode
09-09-2013, 12:39 PM
Syria says it ‘welcomes’ Russia proposal on chemical weapons
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/john-kerry-in-london-campaigns-for-world-to-support-military-strike-against-syria/2013/09/09/e8ad7a72-193d-11e3-80ac-96205cacb45a_story.html

Good if this works and help avoid another senseless military excursion, for that is all it ever will be. Hopefully this will give the congressional hawks time to pause and rethink our plans. Of course, one can never trust Putin and his intentions.

That idea must be curdling the milk of the MIC warhawks. Good. I hope it works.

Rajoo
09-09-2013, 12:51 PM
That idea must be curdling the milk of the MIC warhawks. Good. I hope it works.

MIC is looking forward to a windfall and the hawks are going to have a tough time pushing this through now. And I agree that China and Russia will veto any action against Syria.

Let the Arab League who is so anxious to punish Assad take the initiative since they are mostly funding Al Qaeda.

JJIII
09-09-2013, 01:10 PM
Here is the help we've been waiting for.

(Please excuse the ad.)

http://www.charter.net/tv/3/player/vendor/CNN/player/cnn/asset/cnn-rodman_to_obama_lets_talk-cnn/source/Clips

Dondilion
09-09-2013, 05:35 PM
Syria says it ‘welcomes’ Russia proposal on chemical weapons
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/john-kerry-in-london-campaigns-for-world-to-support-military-strike-against-syria/2013/09/09/e8ad7a72-193d-11e3-80ac-96205cacb45a_story.html

Good if this works and help avoid another senseless military excursion, for that is all it ever will be. Hopefully this will give the congressional hawks time to pause and rethink our plans. Of course, one can never trust Putin and his intentions.

If it were a rogue commander which initiated the chemical attack - German intelligence believes this - then it would be prudent for Assad to hand over control to an international body.

bobabode
09-09-2013, 08:32 PM
Here is the help we've been waiting for.

(Please excuse the ad.)

http://www.charter.net/tv/3/player/vendor/CNN/player/cnn/asset/cnn-rodman_to_obama_lets_talk-cnn/source/Clips

Maybe a game of one on one between Rodman and Assad would be the perfect way to settle this...:rolleyes:

bobabode
09-09-2013, 08:35 PM
MIC is looking forward to a windfall and the hawks are going to have a tough time pushing this through now. And I agree that China and Russia will veto any action against Syria.

Let the Arab League who is so anxious to punish Assad take the initiative since they are mostly funding Al Qaeda.

Too bad the Shrub didn't go after the House of Saud after 9/11.;)

JJIII
09-10-2013, 05:59 AM
Maybe a game of one on one between Rodman and Assad would be the perfect way to settle this...:rolleyes:

What a party this would be... Kim Jong-un, Dennis Rodman, and Bashar al-Assad, best friends forever! :eek:

CarlV
09-10-2013, 10:33 AM
Too bad the Shrub didn't go after Bin Laden in Pakistan after 9/11.;)

Fixed.


Carl