Posted: 9/7/2013 11:07:18 AM EDT
|
The situation in Syria is so confusing. Should the U.S. launch military strikes or not? If only we had some experience with military strikes and the politics of religion in the Mideast to help us make an educated decision...
Oh... ummmm... |
|
Stay out. Why punish them for killing eachother by killing them?
Or this argument "Gas kills civilians and it comes down before they can react, we should punish them with an airstrike", Yeah, like your gonna hear about an airstrike coming down on you before it happens 
|
|
Quoted:
Stay out. Why punish them for killing eachother by killing them? Or this argument "Gas kills civilians and it comes down before they can react, we should punish them with an airstrike", Yeah, like your gonna hear about an airstrike coming down on you before it happens Couldn't agree more. |
|
What are the options?
Option 1: Help our enemy by bombing their opposition. Option 2: Help out other enemy by bombing their opposition. Option 3: Do nothing and let our enemies kill each other? I would be happy to see option 3, so we can stay out and not escalate this CIVIL war beyond it's boarders. Don't get me wrong I don't like civilian casualties, but either way they will get killed. If we bomb either side they will use civilians as human shields. If we do nothing they will die at the hands of each other. I find it odd that NOW Obama wants to try and be Mr. tough guy and actually DO something. Perhaps if he made this kind of effort with the economy, it might not be so bad. But who am I kidding? I don't think there is anything he could touch that he wouldn't screw up. |
|
Quoted:
What are the options? Option 1: Help our enemy by bombing their opposition. Option 2: Help out other enemy by bombing their opposition. Option 3: Do nothing and let our enemies kill each other? I would be happy to see option 3, so we can stay out and not escalate this CIVIL war beyond it's boarders. Don't get me wrong I don't like civilian casualties, but either way they will get killed. If we bomb either side they will use civilians as human shields. If we do nothing they will die at the hands of each other. I find it odd that NOW Obama wants to try and be Mr. tough guy and actually DO something. Perhaps if he made this kind of effort with the economy, it might not be so bad. But who am I kidding? I don't think there is anything he could touch that he wouldn't screw up. I think it's to the point that option 3, is the only sane option there is left. Unfortunately, our leaders are insane! Them dirty rat fucks don't give 2 shits about our economy, our country, our solders or civilians, from here or abroad. If they really gave a fuck about the civilian victims of the chem. attack, the correct action would not be to drop more bombs, killing more civilians. Maybe the correct action would be to bring our solders home, hang a few Traitors, and fix this broken SHIT-PILE, formerly known as the United States of America! 
|
|
We need to stay out of Sryia. We get involved, they hate us. We stay home, they hate us. So what the hell is the point? Besides I don't think it's right that our President or 99% of congress have nothing to lose in these conflicts. The one problem with the volunteer armed services is that their kids don't have to spill their blood. Yes, I know it's just missles and drones. I'm sure we'll never have boots on the ground.
If we are so damn good at regime changes I'll hold up Iraq, Afganistan and Libya as prime democracy examples. It's a civil war, let them kill each other and figure it out. Ed |
|
If it's so important then why aren't any of the Arab countries getting involved? Why are they asking us to do the dirty work? I think putting a fence around the whole middle east and letting them kill each other is the best option but I don't think that will be happening, heck we can't even build a fence along the Mexican border!
This Syria thing could very likely pull Iran into the fight and then all hell would would break loose. |
|
No, it will DEFINITELY pull Iran into it. We don't need to start a world war over something like this.
If it were really about helping people, we would have been in Africa years ago trying to keep all those civilians safe from the rebel and "government" armies. There is other stuff at play here. |
|
I am still not convinced it was not al-quieda gassing the people to bring a response from the international community. Pearl harbor was a "limited air strike with no boots on the ground" that the Japenese were sure could have very few ill repercussions for them, and look how that turned out |
|
Quoted:
What are the options? Option 1: Help our enemy by bombing their opposition. Option 2: Help out other enemy by bombing their opposition. Option 3: Do nothing and let our enemies kill each other? I agree with this. We need to stay out of this mess. Shit happens. We don't always need to roll around in the shit. |
|
Quoted:
I am still not convinced it was not al-quieda gassing the people to bring a response from the international community. Pearl harbor was a "limited air strike with no boots on the ground" that the Japenese were sure could have very few ill repercussions for them, and look how that turned out Agree. Only thing is if Iran is ready to go with nukes then I could see them dropping the gas just to get things spun up. All they need is an excuse like us going to war for them to strike Israel, which is their ultimate goal. If you are at war with USA then you strike their allies. If someone who speaks a different language then me, goes to a different church then me and lives on a different continent then me blows up my neighbors goat farm then we are at war. If we even toss a hand grenade in there they can say we are at war. Hopefully the Muslims will rise up and take Detroit before we have to pay for that turd to be bailed out. |
|
Last I heard our two senators were "undecided" on Syria. Have they stated their positions yet? I sure hope Ron Johnson is against it.
It's funny because my congressman (liberal Mark Pocan) is in a tough spot. His constituents don't want war, he probably doesn't want war, but he says he "needs more info" to make a decision. I guess it's tough saying no to Dear Leader. |
|
Quoted:
We need to stay out of Sryia. We get involved, they hate us. We stay home, they hate us. So what the hell is the point? Besides I don't think it's right that our President or 99% of congress have nothing to lose in these conflicts. The one problem with the volunteer armed services is that their kids don't have to spill their blood. Yes, I know it's just missles and drones. I'm sure we'll never have boots on the ground.
If we are so damn good at regime changes I'll hold up Iraq, Afganistan and Libya as prime democracy examples. It's a civil war, let them kill each other and figure it out. Ed Spot on. Imagine the results if, in 1862, a fleet of Syrian- Iranian - Iraqi warships showed up off the U.S. coast "to help stop the slaughter". In an instant, the Yankees and Rebels would've stopped fighting each other, and would band together to repel the foreign invaders. Kinda like this also... my brother and I are in a fistfight and are seriously out to put a whupping on each other, but if a stranger jumps in to help one or the other, we both turn on him and kick his ass, and forget our squabbles for the time being. Besides all that, Obungo's a Muslim Brotherhood member (so says an Egyptian newspaper) and his side needs some help. That's what this is all about. He WANTS a war. |
|
Syria is Russias ally. Let them worry about it.
Shit, Israel is our only ally in that area. We should only be really concerned about them. Start working on our energy independence instead of blocking oil drilling and stopping coal burning, then the rest of the mideast can go to hell. |
|
Quoted:
0mahg3rd n03z! DO NOT LET THE INTERNET VOTE. I know, I know... and when you put it that way it does sound pretty bad. But the alternative is some form of what we have now, i.e. an elite ruling class who [in theory] listen to their constituents, but ultimately has the power to make a personal decision, majority be damned. I know this is a theoretical conversation, but I really would like to give every adult one vote. On this matter and on every matter. Real time. Internetz style! For it to work there can be no secrets kept from the citizens. I mean, seriously, what the fuck? There is a fundamental flaw with a government system that is rooted in keeping secrets from the citizens. Shit is happening on Earth. We are the Earthlings. We should know ALL THE SHIT. Period. Who is ultimately served by governments keeping secrets? Fuck..I'm off on a rant now. nevermind. As a nature loving, law and order, libertarian-ish atheist, I might not like the results of the Internetz Voting System. But at least I'd be content knowing the results were real. And if it went total shitbags on me, I could choose to go someplace else. Then we could put congress and the electoral college to work at new jobs. Like fracking rough necks or something useful like that. |
|
Quoted:
Fuck the Syrian government and fuck the FSA rebels fighting them 
ETA: FBHO and any government shit head thinking intervention is a good thing  Just to add to that...Fuck Israel, Fuck the Saudis..... FUCK THE REST OF THE WORLD! We have our own problems that we need to solve, like fixing our own country. |