Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Syria in great trouble Options · View
Guest
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 9:26:10 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 535,127
President Obama continued pushing members of Congress to authorize U.S. military action in Syria on Saturday, insisting that the United States must respond to evidence that the Syrian government, under President Bashar Assad, killed almost 1,500 civilians in a chemical attack.
curious3045
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 10:37:26 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/9/2012
Posts: 8,569
Location: Midwest, United States
And,,,, what exactly is your point here???
Smoke775
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 11:20:33 AM

Rank: Rookie Scribe

Joined: 8/24/2013
Posts: 2
Location: Nevada, United States
We don't need to go there, we have our own problems right here in the USA. Let's try to live in peace!!! Just my thoughts
adagio_sabadicus
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 12:48:39 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/24/2013
Posts: 1,279
The trouble with Syria, is the same world over...people want individual freedoms. Lets not get caught up in something that is internal. When is the UN going to ever do its job. The US can't be the world police.

[
MadMartigan
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 1:15:15 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 6/17/2013
Posts: 2,095
Location: United States
adagio wrote:
The trouble with Syria, is the same world over...people want individual freedoms. Lets not get caught up in something that is internal. When is the UN going to ever do its job. The US can't be the world police.


d'oh!

The UN isn't what you think it is and has absolutely no power whatsoever outside of making suggestions.

It is a world political figurehead, proven by the fact that many of the countries that engage in warm crimes, crimes against humanity, oppression, you name it, are apart of the UN. It is mostly a useless world political entity. Especially when you have China and Russia around to veto nearly everything.

If you want a world police, the only way you'll do it is to give the UN actual power to engage in military intervention. Basically, it needs abilities closer to NATO than anything.
Rembacher
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 8:19:48 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,106
MadMartigan wrote:


If you want a world police, the only way you'll do it is to give the UN actual power to engage in military intervention. Basically, it needs abilities closer to NATO than anything.


Who would provide the military might to make those moves? Won't there still be a refusal to send troops to attack your ally? The only thing that I would suggest might work, would be for each UN country to contribute one military unit to the UN to use as it sees fit, when it sees fit. A true UN military. And even then, units might refuse to act against their country's allies.
BiMale73
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 8:34:24 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 7/4/2013
Posts: 418
Location: Basement
There should not be any permanent members with veto rights in the security counsil. It's based on the idea that the world would never really change. Why France and not Germany? Why China and not India? Why only countries from the northern hemisphere?

adagio_sabadicus
Posted: Sunday, September 08, 2013 9:07:11 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/24/2013
Posts: 1,279
It's deja vous all over again. When Allah meets Harry...only Harry wants certain freedoms, but despots wont allow. OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!

[
nazhinaz
Posted: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 7:53:38 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
Please, the members of Congress, understand the reality.
We can't do what the Syrian people could not during their "fight for democracy" for the last almost 3 years.
We can't change the ground reality; the religious forces do have majority following in Syria and other Middle Eastern countries.
Why should we dabble in Syria when we do have so much at hand in US?
DutchMike88
Posted: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:50:38 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/17/2012
Posts: 118
Location: Netherlands
A few issues that come to mind when thinking about Syria:
There is a very powerful community called the LIGA who are far better suited to deal with problems in the middle east. Why is it that the Western world always needs a hand in this?

Second issue:
I'm very interested in what other people thing but in my opinion there is no good outcome for Obama/the USA. On one hand; if he interferes in the Syrian crisis he will be shamed as the aggressor by "terrorists" and on the other; if he doesn't he'll be hated for "letting poor (Muslim) Syrians" die! Either way they will make him the bad guy and create more hatred towards the western world.

Also:
A large part of the American economy is based on or related to the industries of war. The issues in Iraq/Afghanistan are simmering down (Yes they're still big, but the large missions are ending). Isn't this all one big lobby by the US war industries for new investments in the sector?

When answering to my issues, please keep in mind I push these subject for discussion purposes and not to incriminate or hurt anybodies feelings or religion.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 1:03:33 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
Putin is giving Obama a way to end the situation 'gracefully' and he should take it because he's not going to get the votes he needs from Congress. No evidence from the UN yet. No support from the UK. A war-weary population. A catastrophic deficit. And yes, we appreciate the vague assurances that it's going to be *quote* "extremely limited" but repercussions and reprisals from Syria and it's allies are unknown and it's very possible it will drag the US into yet another ongoing long-term disaster. My mind is still boggled by all the faulty logic and excuses that's trying to be spun in order to justify an attack. Yes, the videos are awful. But you don't know *definitively* who is behind the attack. The arguments about altruism are also annoying. What world powers rushed in to save the day for the genocides and atrocities in Rwanda, Darfur, Cambodia? Playing the global hero card is weak. Obama needs to take the deal Putin has laid out before he is further embarrassed when congress ultimately votes no. I do applaud Obama for taking it to congress however, while he was undoubtedly under pressure, and not just rolling out the attack like his predecessor probably would have.


Ajax
Posted: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 8:16:15 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/17/2013
Posts: 2,176
Location: getting some sun , United States
Last i checked on MSNBC, 74% of the vote is against taking any action. The people have spoken.

Buz
Posted: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 8:36:11 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,798
Location: Atlanta, United States
Neither side in the Syrian conflict is a friend to the US or the western world. Getting involved is a losing prospect all the way around for the US. The UK, Canada, Australia and all other US allies, except for France, refuse to get involved. Surely Obama will accept Putin's plan because it gives him some way to save face. However, everyone knows Putin upstaged him politically and is currently reveling in that fact. In general US leadership has looked weak, indecisive and amateurish throughout this entire matter.

Personally, I flooded my 2 US senators and my US congressman with emails urging them to vote against any involvement in Syria.

No new wars!

Americanheart
Posted: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 8:52:12 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 5/18/2012
Posts: 8,853
Location: Frozen, United States
The UN and NATO should be the ones to do something about the conflict in Syria. U.S. should not get involve. As an American citizen I oppose the attack with Syria.

jeremiahbull
Posted: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 10:56:10 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/30/2011
Posts: 1,988
Location: United States
Syria needs to be punished for the use of chemical weapons but was it the government or the rebels? Will we ever know? If all the weapons are turned over by Syria we will have the best outcome under the circumstances.

Now if we knew for certain the government was responsible I would support unilateral action of a targeted strike as punishment. No boots on the ground, punish to deliver a message. The UN never has the balls to do anything.
Melman
Posted: Thursday, September 12, 2013 1:22:02 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 5/5/2013
Posts: 62
Location: United States
IT is not our Job as the USA to dole out any kind of "punishment". Enough already.
ByronLord
Posted: Thursday, September 12, 2013 8:14:01 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 753
Location: Massachusetts, United States
Dancing_Doll wrote:
Putin is giving Obama a way to end the situation 'gracefully' and he should take it because he's not going to get the votes he needs from Congress. No evidence from the UN yet. No support from the UK. A war-weary population...


He should take it but for a different reason, the Russian and US objectives in Syria are actually more compatible than most imagine.

Putin wants to keep his port and to prevent a continuation of the 'Arab Spring' domino theory into the Caspian sea region and many unstable ex-Soviet republics on Russian's border. The US wants to push Assad out because he has lost control of the country and is no longer viable. Both powers will ensure that Al Qaeda does not get a toe hold.

Note that Putin does not need Assad to survive. But he can't push him out either. Not without cause as then he would look weak.

The Russian proposal has two important effects, first it gets Obama out of a domestic political bind in which he is being forced to take military action he knows will be ineffective so as to avoid loss of face. Throwing the choice to Congress was a poor way out of that bind, it was a lose-lose proposition. Either Congress says no and the President looks weak or he has to bomb which is not going to dislodge Assad. The second is that it creates the illusion that Russia is still a power to be reckoned with.

Assad has little choice but to comply with Russia's demand. If he did not then Russia's logical response would be let the Syrian army know that it is time for them to find a new President. Assad's refusal would give them the opening to do that and they must be as sick of Assad as China is of North Korea or the US of Saudi Arabia.

jeremiahbull
Posted: Friday, September 13, 2013 12:47:51 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/30/2011
Posts: 1,988
Location: United States
Melman wrote:
IT is not our Job as the USA to dole out any kind of "punishment". Enough already.


"It's not my job" is one of the phrases I most dislike. It may not be in your job description but if it needs to be done and no one else is willing to do it, you should step up to the plate.
Dementorkissed
Posted: Friday, September 13, 2013 3:00:48 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 12/24/2012
Posts: 174
Location: United States
what you thing... America goes and "punishes" Al-Assad and the people of that area are going to start linking America? think again.. they hate the USA and will make up reasons to hate the USA every chance they get.

In Syria, Both sides are evil.. (belive it or not that is possible) .. on one side its the brutal Al-Assad who will do anything he can to keep himself and his tribe in power.. and on the other side are a group of hard core exteemists..most of them affiliated / funded by Al-Qaida and other groups who hate the USA and the West with every ounce of their being.

Right now the opposition needs help over throw Al-Assad and knowing their mentality they are more than capable of using these weapons on innocent people just so that they can get another stronghold in the region.. (Iraq, Afgahinstan, Somalia being the other full strongholds)..

Syria is going to end up like Mali,Sudan or Nigeria where the country is split into two and they keep fighting each other and leave the rest of the world alone.. the world can ONLY help those who help themselves..

In my opinion (yes it might sound bad) its time to let them fight it out for themselves.

“When one door of happiness closes, another opens; but often we look so long at the closed door that we do not see the one which has been opened for us.”
― Helen Keller
Jack_42
Posted: Friday, September 13, 2013 3:40:01 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/21/2009
Posts: 986
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Oh another example of weapons of mass destruction - I'm still waiting for the first lot to be uncovered. Of course there couldn't be a hidden agenda at work here? No danger to the flow of traffic along the motor ways? Besides you're just as dead if killed by a machine gun wielded by a nice soldier from the UK or the US who is saving you from yourself or a high explosive bomb landing on the village but dropped by a philanthropic airman with your welfare totally to heart. (why doesn't that qualify as a weapon of mass destruction or chemical warfare?). You can really understand why this guy got the peace prize so well deserved. Yes he should join young Harry who ''takes a life to save a life'' and is good at shooting terrorists in Afghanistan because he's skillful on his Sony Play Station.
Guest
Posted: Saturday, September 14, 2013 9:58:28 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 535,127
Obama was trying to do the right thing. And I think it laughable and at the same time appalling that the Republican Party can so suddenly become the doves of the nation. But it wasn't that long ago the U.S. turned their head when it was clear that Hussein was using biological weapons against Iran. Suddenly, the nation finds a moral backbone.

I'm no supporter of Iran, but aren't they human beings too? I think the U.S. would be better understood and less hated if we were at least consistent.
LadyX
Posted: Sunday, September 15, 2013 10:38:51 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,827
You know you're doing foreign policy wrong when your actions and rhetoric make Putin look like a humanitarian. Magellan wasn't as all over the map as Obama was in that speech he gave. Assad is a threat to national security...but he can't threaten our soldiers, says Obama. Huh? Then shortly after calling the US the world's oldest constitutional democracy, Obama said he does not need Congress in order to wage war. Perfect.

Obama: "to my friends on the left..."Hey Barry, you don't get to guilt anybody using the cudgel of poor Syria, I never killed any children...have you? Answer honestly, please.
WellMadeMale
Posted: Sunday, September 15, 2013 11:20:49 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,289
Location: Cakeland, United States
Kristind wrote:
And I think it laughable and at the same time appalling that the Republican Party can so suddenly become the doves of the nation. But it wasn't that long ago the U.S. turned their head when it was clear that Hussein was using biological weapons against Iran. Suddenly, the nation finds a moral backbone.





If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
Guest
Posted: Sunday, September 15, 2013 1:26:29 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 535,127

Men give themselves rights to which they don't even measure up to, continuously seeking to straighten out the rest. It's become an old joke.

Stop treating each other like shit, and stop condescending. Both of you. Now go sit in the corner until dinner is ready.
AngelHeart01
Posted: Sunday, September 15, 2013 4:21:24 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/23/2010
Posts: 3,139
Location: ♥ Southern Style ♥, United States
Buz wrote:
Neither side in the Syrian conflict is a friend to the US or the western world. Getting involved is a losing prospect all the way around for the US. The UK, Canada, Australia and all other US allies, except for France, refuse to get involved. Surely Obama will accept Putin's plan because it gives him some way to save face. However, everyone knows Putin upstaged him politically and is currently reveling in that fact. In general US leadership has looked weak, indecisive and amateurish throughout this entire matter.

Personally, I flooded my 2 US senators and my US congressman with emails urging them to vote against any involvement in Syria.

No new wars!


I hear ya, and second "No New Wars".

Guest
Posted: Sunday, September 15, 2013 4:27:50 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 535,127
It's a save all to bad economy. Insurgency tends to bring about economic insurgency. And, he's got to gain a pair for the incumbent.
Guest
Posted: Sunday, September 15, 2013 4:55:02 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 535,127
So, here we go, again.



"The Great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign Nations is in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled, with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. . . ." George Washington.

Depending on the president, it seems spurring interests are self indulged.
WellMadeMale
Posted: Sunday, October 20, 2013 4:49:35 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,289
Location: Cakeland, United States
Once again, as with Iraq & the yellowcake uranium claims - purported by a hoodwinked Colin Powell - there is no evidence Assad used any poisonous gas against his own people and as usual the USG and the Controlled Major Mass Media (CMMM) are lying in unity to support these US government liars.



Go ahead everyone... forget all about the recent past 50 years, swallow the bullshit your government is attempting to shove down our throats. Just because it's a Democratic Administration instead of a Republican Administration rushing to invade a new middle eastern country - doesn't make this shit 'right'.



If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.