• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kerry: U.S. Pledges $60M in NEW AID to Syria Opposition.....

MMC said:
What does Muslims have to do with Sunni led governments? Do you even know what the difference is between Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims? What does the MB have to do with Kerry and Obama coming out publicly in support of those on that terrorist list? Which have to do with the Syrian Opposition.

What happened with Selah and those Sunni leaders that are in power now?

Now you can run for the hills! :roll:
Click to expand...

Terror lists change daily, what doesn't is the need to oust Assad before he kills more Syrians.
Saudi Arabia is a Sunni nation, are they terrorists? Sunnis are also in the majority in Syria. How do you propose to oppose them?
Kill them all like Assad is trying?
 
iguanaman said:
Terror lists change daily, what doesn't is the need to oust Assad before he kills more Syrians.
Saudi Arabia is a Sunni nation, are they terrorists? Sunnis are also in the majority in Syria. How do you propose to oppose them?
Kill them all like Assad is trying?
Click to expand...

Sunni Arabs have been killing shi'tes thru systematic genocide, oppressing them, suppressing them and have been doing so forever. No one can deny such. Most of all not any of those Sunni Arabs. So what, Sunni Arabs Control Almost all those Middle East Countries. This doesn't mean you hand over countries to them just because they say whatever out of their mouths. Who gives a chit what the Sunni says out of their mouth. Wake up.....none are superpowers and none need to be treated as if they were.

Terror list change daily.....yeah with whats Added. Moreover what does that have to do with a group that is on the list. Is there any excuse by Team Obama that can be even used for such incompetency. Other than Assad must be removed. Again what don't you get about 29 Opposition groups defying the US and stating they will set up a Country under Sharia law. What part of that.....do you not understand? We are into these jerkoffs for 385 million already and we are not officially involved. Did you catch that part yet? Now we hand them 60 more million. Why Obama runs around the Country crying wolf and demonizing Republicans over a sequester he came up with and now has renigged on the deal.

Red Cross already busted out these Rebels for massacring Christians and other Sunni Arabs that wont back them. API already reported on how the Rebels use Children to stage their attacks. Which doesn't count anything against Assad and the ****es. Is it alright for the Sunni Arabs to kill more Syrians?

How do you oppose them. Politically, Financially, and if they then rise up and kill people all because they want to take over the Country. Then One does what is necessary. Any reason that the Sunni Arabs cant take their Azzes back to the Countries they already Run? Whats the matter with those Sunni Arabs in Syria taking their azzes back to Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, just to name a few.. As you can see it's not like they don't have any place to go.
 
Last edited:
Syrian FM accuses US of double standards.....

164840e240e6e5072a0f6a7067002fbd.jpg


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Syria's foreign minister is accusing the United States of double standards and says the decision by the Obama administration to provide aid to rebels fighting to topple President Bashar Assad is prolonging the conflict.

Walid al-Moallem says it's inconceivable that Washington allocates $60 million in assistance to Syrian opposition groups while it continues to "kill the Syrian people" through economic sanctions imposed against the country.

The top Syrian diplomat warned against foreign interference, saying Syria's sovereignty is a "red line.".....snip~

Syrian FM accuses US of double standards - Yahoo! News

Looks like Assad has drawn the line in the Sand! Now today the Rebels are bitching at the US and say they don't want Food and medical Aid. THEY WANT WEAPONS!
 
MMC said:
Yeah, I misspoke it was Assistant Administrator. But you can look up some of the jobs they have open. I heard Senator Coburn was looking them up this morning too. As he was going to send a letter off to the White House about them. Point being was Obama saying that such would affect the Military and National Security. But like I said any looking for jobs can check the web sites for themselves.

If people want to come up with some of the Absurd Positions they do have open and post them up. I wouldn't Object.
Click to expand...

Those positions will remain posted and they will keep taking applications. But there is a hiring freeze in effect currently. There are plenty of people out there right now who have been offered federal positions but are in limbo because they are being told they can't start until the budget issues are resolved.
 
Grant said:
That's usually what the internationally community does regarding genocide but you are misusing the term here.
Click to expand...

Check this out Grant.....

Rebels dismayed over US statement on Syrian conflict.....

The rebels, who are battling the regime of President Bashar al-Assad, are specifically reacting to statements from State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland. On Thursday she said Washington is “deeply concerned” about the threat of potential massacres in Aleppo, but that the United States will not assist in the supply of arms to the opposition.

ss-120719-syria-uprising-tease.photoblog600.jpg


Rebels say that 100 armored vehicles have already been sent to attack the city of 3 million people. Aleppo is already surrounded and strafed by jet and helicopters.....snip~

Rebels dismayed over US statement on Syrian conflict - World News

Syrian rebel chief pleads for weapons.....

BEIRUT (AP) — The chief of Syrian rebel forces said Friday that his fighters are in "desperate" need of weapons and ammunition rather than the food supplies and bandages that the U.S. now plans to provide.

70ddeea301d1af072a0f6a706700c93b.jpg


The Obama administration on Thursday announced it was giving an additional $60 million in assistance to the country's political opposition and said that it would, for the first time, provide non-lethal aid directly to rebels battling to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Gen. Salim Idris, chief of staff of the Syrian opposition's Supreme Military Council, said the modest package of aid to rebels — consisting of an undetermined amount of food rations and medical supplies — will not help them win against Assad's forces who have superior air power.

"We don't want food and drink and we don't want bandages. When we're wounded, we want to die. The only thing we want is weapons," he told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.....snip~

Syrian rebel chief pleads for weapons - Yahoo! News

Quite the Unappreciative Lames they are.....huh? Modest package with the Suad and Qataris upping over 300 million to their azzes. Not counting anybody else.
 
Sarcogito said:
Is that Jim Carrey from The Mask in that poster?
Click to expand...

Looks like that's what they are depicting. Plus the Weapons.

Did you note the lie by Team Obama.....first time ever of providing Soft Aid. After giving 385 million and Hillary admitting we were providing soft aid before. Did Obama and Kerry forget Clintons Friends of Syria meeting wherein she admitted such last year?
Do you think they were hopin that the media would help try and cover that over?
 
a351 said:
Removing Assad generally falls within the interests of the international community at large.
Click to expand...

That is a matter of opinion - one that is certainly not shared by Assad.
 
Grant said:
There will less stability now than there has ever been as the Islamists understand that the western democracies become bored with war quite quickly and want to leave at the sight of the first body bags. Islamists have no such fears. When "exit strategies" become more important than winning the war then you know that a significant historical moment has passed.

Assad is just one of many such types in the Middle East and will be replaced by someone just as bad, or worse. There is no outcry now for democracy as there once was when the Iraqis held their first elections ever and celebrated by holding up there purple thumbs. The Americans turned on their won leadership, the Europeans joined in, and the Islamists won the propaganda war. They will continue to win.
Click to expand...

Well said. Time for us to keep our noses out of the whole mess.
 
Just where are those Rebels getting helicopters and jets.....Now? Moreover Assad has told the Russians with the Upcoming Election next year.....that the People of Syria will decide who their next Leader would be.

What happens if Assad holds on for another year and then loses the Election and steps down from power. Yet stopping these Rebels with their MB and AQ backing So that they cannot put a Sunni Arab from Another Country in power. But then Put a Syrian Muslim, Sunni or Shi'te in power. Then what takes place with that International Community? Then that region?
 
a351 said:
Did you take the time to read the post you responded to? Assad's removal would be welcomed by much of the region and the international community at large. How that statement warrants an "Oh yeah? How's that working for A, B and C!" is beyond me.

This isn't coherent. Seriously. Read it twice and can't come up with anything.
Click to expand...

Just as Mubarak 'had to go' and how Gaddafi had to go, and now Assad has to go and soon the leadership of Bahrain and others, with the exception of Iran, will have to go. Why do you think this is happening over such a brief period of time and how does it advance democracy or help the United States? Why is this happening in the Middle East and not in Africa, for example, where the dictators have been as bad or worse? It seems important to ask these questions as well as to consider what Obama meant when he told Putin, through his aide, that he would be more 'flexible' during his second term. It is also worthwhile noting his antipathy towards Israel.
 
MMC said:
Looks like that's what they are depicting. Plus the Weapons.

Did you note the lie by Team Obama.....first time ever of providing Soft Aid. After giving 385 million and Hillary admitting we were providing soft aid before. Did Obama and Kerry forget Clintons Friends of Syria meeting wherein she admitted such last year?
Do you think they were hopin that the media would help try and cover that over?
Click to expand...

It's clear that the Obama Administration has the same respect for the mainstream media that the general public has, though for possibly different reasons.
 
Grant said:
It's clear that the Obama Administration has the same respect for the mainstream media that the general public has, though for possibly different reasons.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well Kerry is saying transition to democracy and they are saying something completely different. I know we may be deaf but we are not blind.
 
Who would have thunk it? We are now involved in another Civil War.
 
hfd said:
Who would have thunk it? We are now involved in another Civil War.
Click to expand...

We've been supplying aid to rebels for months and our NATO ally (Turkey) supplies weapons. We've been involved in this civil war for a long time. This, of course, in attempt to counter the Iranian regime.
 
MMC said:
Check this out Grant.....

Rebels dismayed over US statement on Syrian conflict.....

The rebels, who are battling the regime of President Bashar al-Assad, are specifically reacting to statements from State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland. On Thursday she said Washington is “deeply concerned” about the threat of potential massacres in Aleppo, but that the United States will not assist in the supply of arms to the opposition.

ss-120719-syria-uprising-tease.photoblog600.jpg


Rebels say that 100 armored vehicles have already been sent to attack the city of 3 million people. Aleppo is already surrounded and strafed by jet and helicopters.....snip~

Rebels dismayed over US statement on Syrian conflict - World News

Syrian rebel chief pleads for weapons.....

BEIRUT (AP) — The chief of Syrian rebel forces said Friday that his fighters are in "desperate" need of weapons and ammunition rather than the food supplies and bandages that the U.S. now plans to provide.

70ddeea301d1af072a0f6a706700c93b.jpg


The Obama administration on Thursday announced it was giving an additional $60 million in assistance to the country's political opposition and said that it would, for the first time, provide non-lethal aid directly to rebels battling to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Gen. Salim Idris, chief of staff of the Syrian opposition's Supreme Military Council, said the modest package of aid to rebels — consisting of an undetermined amount of food rations and medical supplies — will not help them win against Assad's forces who have superior air power.

"We don't want food and drink and we don't want bandages. When we're wounded, we want to die. The only thing we want is weapons," he told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.....snip~

Syrian rebel chief pleads for weapons - Yahoo! News

Quite the Unappreciative Lames they are.....huh? Modest package with the Suad and Qataris upping over 300 million to their azzes. Not counting anybody else.
Click to expand...

IOW, Obama is wrong for giving too much aid to the Syrian rebels, and he's wrong for not giving enough aid to the Syrian rebels!!
 
sangha said:
IOW, Obama is wrong for giving too much aid to the Syrian rebels, and he's wrong for not giving enough aid to the Syrian rebels!!
Click to expand...

And that's what you were able to discern after all that reading?
 
Grant said:
And that's what you were able to discern after all that reading?
Click to expand...

They tend to not notice due to the Neo Cons always wanting to get off into that nation building. Guess they haven't figure it out yet.

Assad stated this morning he is not stepping down. He will is willing to talk with these Rebels but they have to surrender their arms. If Assad could terminate the defectors that are a couple of the Leaders. He may be able to hold until that Election.

Yet I would like to know what planes are flying around Aleppo that are not Assad's Same deal with the Choppers. Don't forget these Rebels like to exaggerate things as well.
 
:doh I facepalm everytime I see how many of my fellow Americans have thrown common sense out the window and fallen for this idiotic isolationist crap certain politicians are peddling as a snake oil cure-all. I think Hitchens said it best with "What the isolationists don't understand is that non-intervention doesn't mean nothing happens; it means something else happens." To believe that international events will turn out better for us in the end if we just passively sit here with our hands in our pockets flies in the face of common sense. It's stupid. Plain and simple. Such a tautology applies absolutely no where else in our lives, but all of a sudden it's now true for international affairs? :roll: Wake up! It's like saying "i'm not gonna vote at all because what if the guy I vote for ends up being a bad president?". REALLY?

Believe me, I understand the appeal. Americans are weary of a decade of a war with seemingly nothing to show but a thankless Afghanistan and Iraq. It's easy to listen to a politician when he says we can bring all our troops, stop spending money on foreign countries, AND international events will work out better for us in the end? Sounds almost too good to be true, right? Because it is. It's bull****. The isolationist politicians are used car salesmen trying to sell you a stinker, telling you everything you want to hear, and it can all be yours if you just sign right here at the bottom. Not only that, but we've test drove this car before. And it hasn't worked out well, to say the least.

Quite frankly, $60 billion in humanitarian aid is too little too late. Obama had an opportunity to get seriously involved and do much more early on, but he squandered that with his "Look away" foreign policy, which left a power vacuum and opend up the door for foreign global jihadists to gain a foodhold among the rebels who were hungry to get support from wherever they could find it. Now over 70,000 have been killed (mostly civilians, not combatants mind you), 200,000 political prisoners have been taken, 2million are homeless within Syria, and another million have fled for refuge across borders.

Even if the humanitarian imperative doesn't sway your cold heart, we have self interest in the crisis as well. Like it or not we do not live in a vacuum. Events that happen across the world have an impact on us. If Syria is left to continue to fracture and wallow in civil war, it threatens our efforts to ensure a the world's energy supply, contain terrorism, and risks destabilizing other middle east nations especially Jordan which is being overrun with refugees, Iraq, and Lebanon which has already experiencing a spill-over in violence.
 
the_recruit said:
:doh I facepalm everytime I see how many of my fellow Americans have thrown common sense out the window and fallen for this idiotic isolationist crap certain politicians are peddling as a snake oil cure-all. I think Hitchens said it best with "What the isolationists don't understand is that non-intervention doesn't mean nothing happens; it means something else happens." To believe that international events will turn out better for us in the end if we just passively sit here with our hands in our pockets flies in the face of common sense. It's stupid. Plain and simple. Such a tautology applies absolutely no where else in our lives, but all of a sudden it's now true for international affairs? :roll: Wake up! It's like saying "i'm not gonna vote at all because what if the guy I vote for ends up being a bad president?". REALLY?

Believe me, I understand the appeal. Americans are weary of a decade of a war with seemingly nothing to show but a thankless Afghanistan and Iraq. It's easy to listen to a politician when he says we can bring all our troops, stop spending money on foreign countries, AND international events will work out better for us in the end? Sounds almost too good to be true, right? Because it is. It's bull****. The isolationist politicians are used car salesmen trying to sell you a stinker, telling you everything you want to hear, and it can all be yours if you just sign right here at the bottom. Not only that, but we've test drove this car before. And it hasn't worked out well, to say the least.

Quite frankly, $60 billion in humanitarian aid is too little too late. Obama had an opportunity to get seriously involved and do much more early on, but he squandered that with his "Look away" foreign policy, which left a power vacuum and opend up the door for foreign global jihadists to gain a foodhold among the rebels who were hungry to get support from wherever they could find it. Now over 70,000 have been killed (mostly civilians, not combatants mind you), 200,000 political prisoners have been taken, 2million are homeless within Syria, and another million have fled for refuge across borders.

Even if the humanitarian imperative doesn't sway your cold heart, we have self interest in the crisis as well. Like it or not we do not live in a vacuum. Events that happen across the world have an impact on us. If Syria is left to continue to fracture and wallow in civil war, it threatens our efforts to ensure a the world's energy supply, contain terrorism, and risks destabilizing other middle east nations especially Jordan which is being overrun with refugees, Iraq, and Lebanon which has already experiencing a spill-over in violence.
Click to expand...

Americans have every right to feel angry and frustrated because, despite the billions of dollars spent, no real progress has been made. In fact it could be argued that the world situation is worsening.

At one time American leadership realized that the Communism was an evil thing and the Cold War continued from one administration to the next and, for the most part, followed George Kennan's suggestions on 'containment'.

Now there is no continuation of policy, no real long term plans and more emphasis stressed on 'exit strategies' than in winning wars. As well, Americans have been accused by their former allies, especially in western Europe, of assuming the role of the 'world's policeman', and American's are naturally tired of all this sniping while they're continually being called upon to solve the world's problems.

What is need, it seems to me, is a forum composed only of the world's democracies, where fair and open elections are being applied and human rights and freedoms are being protected. The United Nations is a waste of time, money and space and the democracies should let it fold. It is now only a forum for dictators.

From there a well considered long term plan should be established on how to spread human rights and freedoms throughout the world for everyone, with every democracy shouldering it's share of the burden. Until that happens it's easy to see why the American people should be fed up with carrying the load for the rest of the world, and with nothing in return but Monday morning quarterbacking and criticisms. As far as I'm concerned there should be less time spent on 'nation building' and more time spent on where to drop the next daisy cutter. That will catch the attention of the world's despots far more quickly and effectively and, if Germany, Italy and Japan are any examples, with long term positive consequences.
 
the_recruit said:
:doh I facepalm everytime I see how many of my fellow Americans have thrown common sense out the window and fallen for this idiotic isolationist crap certain politicians are peddling as a snake oil cure-all. I think Hitchens said it best with "What the isolationists don't understand is that non-intervention doesn't mean nothing happens; it means something else happens." To believe that international events will turn out better for us in the end if we just passively sit here with our hands in our pockets flies in the face of common sense. It's stupid. Plain and simple. Such a tautology applies absolutely no where else in our lives, but all of a sudden it's now true for international affairs? :roll: Wake up! It's like saying "i'm not gonna vote at all because what if the guy I vote for ends up being a bad president?". REALLY?

Believe me, I understand the appeal. Americans are weary of a decade of a war with seemingly nothing to show but a thankless Afghanistan and Iraq. It's easy to listen to a politician when he says we can bring all our troops, stop spending money on foreign countries, AND international events will work out better for us in the end? Sounds almost too good to be true, right? Because it is. It's bull****. The isolationist politicians are used car salesmen trying to sell you a stinker, telling you everything you want to hear, and it can all be yours if you just sign right here at the bottom. Not only that, but we've test drove this car before. And it hasn't worked out well, to say the least.

Quite frankly, $60 billion in humanitarian aid is too little too late. Obama had an opportunity to get seriously involved and do much more early on, but he squandered that with his "Look away" foreign policy, which left a power vacuum and opend up the door for foreign global jihadists to gain a foodhold among the rebels who were hungry to get support from wherever they could find it. Now over 70,000 have been killed (mostly civilians, not combatants mind you), 200,000 political prisoners have been taken, 2million are homeless within Syria, and another million have fled for refuge across borders.

Even if the humanitarian imperative doesn't sway your cold heart, we have self interest in the crisis as well. Like it or not we do not live in a vacuum. Events that happen across the world have an impact on us. If Syria is left to continue to fracture and wallow in civil war, it threatens our efforts to ensure a the world's energy supply, contain terrorism, and risks destabilizing other middle east nations especially Jordan which is being overrun with refugees, Iraq, and Lebanon which has already experiencing a spill-over in violence.
Click to expand...


If Syria is left to wallow in a Civil war it wont cause any major affects to the Worlds Energy Supply. Involving ourselves in Syria will not contain terrorism. Moreover the Sunni have already proven thru their own actions and Elections, accepting Democracy on their terms. Has not stabilized the region!

Also it is not just 60 million. Already we have given 385 million. Which is not counting the Billion or so that the Saudis have given. Nor any other Aid from others.

Syria doesn't even have a major effect on our National Security.....nor does it need to become one, either.
 
the_recruit said:
:doh I facepalm everytime I see how many of my fellow Americans have thrown common sense out the window and fallen for this idiotic isolationist crap certain politicians are peddling as a snake oil cure-all. I think Hitchens said it best with "What the isolationists don't understand is that non-intervention doesn't mean nothing happens; it means something else happens." To believe that international events will turn out better for us in the end if we just passively sit here with our hands in our pockets flies in the face of common sense. It's stupid. Plain and simple. Such a tautology applies absolutely no where else in our lives, but all of a sudden it's now true for international affairs? :roll: Wake up! It's like saying "i'm not gonna vote at all because what if the guy I vote for ends up being a bad president?". REALLY?

Believe me, I understand the appeal. Americans are weary of a decade of a war with seemingly nothing to show but a thankless Afghanistan and Iraq. It's easy to listen to a politician when he says we can bring all our troops, stop spending money on foreign countries, AND international events will work out better for us in the end? Sounds almost too good to be true, right? Because it is. It's bull****. The isolationist politicians are used car salesmen trying to sell you a stinker, telling you everything you want to hear, and it can all be yours if you just sign right here at the bottom. Not only that, but we've test drove this car before. And it hasn't worked out well, to say the least.

Quite frankly, $60 billion in humanitarian aid is too little too late. Obama had an opportunity to get seriously involved and do much more early on, but he squandered that with his "Look away" foreign policy, which left a power vacuum and opend up the door for foreign global jihadists to gain a foodhold among the rebels who were hungry to get support from wherever they could find it. Now over 70,000 have been killed (mostly civilians, not combatants mind you), 200,000 political prisoners have been taken, 2million are homeless within Syria, and another million have fled for refuge across borders.

Even if the humanitarian imperative doesn't sway your cold heart, we have self interest in the crisis as well. Like it or not we do not live in a vacuum. Events that happen across the world have an impact on us. If Syria is left to continue to fracture and wallow in civil war, it threatens our efforts to ensure a the world's energy supply, contain terrorism, and risks destabilizing other middle east nations especially Jordan which is being overrun with refugees, Iraq, and Lebanon which has already experiencing a spill-over in violence.
Click to expand...

and you really belief that the Syrian people are going to remember the US helped them? Through the years we have helped many people. Of the countries we have helped I don't see a lot of them saying yea for America. But hey, whats borrowing another 24 or the 60 million to help out friends.:mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom