• 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!

Critics see contradictions in Obama administration's Syria claims

DaveFagan said:
All the UN inspectors will say is that, "gas killed people." They were specifically ordered not to determine blame or who used the gas. How's that for a waste of time?
Click to expand...

That is a colossal waste of time. lol
 
Ari said:
Yeah, I'm really not liking how's he's handling this.
Click to expand...

His Secretary of State, Kerry, put a wrench in the whole process with his stupid remarks today. There is no way that congress will vote for the motion now and no way that anyone else in the international community will join in.

I can't remember a time when American foreign policy was so poorly handled.
 
CanadaJohn said:
His Secretary of State, Kerry, put a wrench in the whole process with his stupid remarks today. There is no way that congress will vote for the motion now and no way that anyone else in the international community will join in.

I can't remember a time when American foreign policy was so poorly handled.
Click to expand...

Agreed, good afternoon jcj...
 
CanadaJohn said:
His Secretary of State, Kerry, put a wrench in the whole process with his stupid remarks today. There is no way that congress will vote for the motion now and no way that anyone else in the international community will join in.

I can't remember a time when American foreign policy was so poorly handled.
Click to expand...
What did Kerry say today? Yes, this definitely a bumbling response from the beginning when he drew a "red line".
 
Ari said:
What did Kerry say today? Yes, this definitely a bumbling response from the beginning when he drew a "red line".
Click to expand...

To paraphrase, Kerry basically said that Syria could avoid military action if Assad agreed to let international inspectors into Syria to take control of all chemical weapons in the country. The Russians pounced on this and said they would work with Assad to see if this can be done and Assad is quoted as saying he'd consider it. No chance to move militarily now until that issue is settled.
 
CanadaJohn said:
To paraphrase, Kerry basically said that Syria could avoid military action if Assad agreed to let international inspectors into Syria to take control of all chemical weapons in the country. The Russians pounced on this and said they would work with Assad to see if this can be done and Assad is quoted as saying he'd consider it. No chance to move militarily now until that issue is settled.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be so anti-climatic if Assad was like "Yeah, sure here ya go" and then everyone just left it at that?
 
CanadaJohn said:
Is Texas A&M the team with the Heizman quarterback?
Click to expand...

Yes, but not to derail the thread, it doesn't appear Kerry and the President are communicating at all and are looking at different playbooks...
 
CanadaJohn said:
To paraphrase, Kerry basically said that Syria could avoid military action if Assad agreed to let international inspectors into Syria to take control of all chemical weapons in the country. The Russians pounced on this and said they would work with Assad to see if this can be done and Assad is quoted as saying he'd consider it. No chance to move militarily now until that issue is settled.
Click to expand...

Good afternoon, CJ. :2wave:

I wonder how many people will be disappointed? Some I guess, but not too many, I'll wager, because most of the people I have talked with are just plain "war weary" at this point, and would like to insist that domestic problems be tackled and handled instead! Jobs and infrastructure seem to be the main topics on everyone's mind! :thumbs:
 
Ari said:
Wouldn't it be so anti-climatic if Assad was like "Yeah, sure here ya go" and then everyone just left it at that?
Click to expand...

If Assad says yes, it will be years before inspectors actually get organized, get in, etc. and who's to say all the chemical weapons will be rounded up. But if he does say yes, how can Obama and the US then attack? Assad can take the time to try and destroy all opposition.
 
polgara said:
Good afternoon, CJ. :2wave:

I wonder how many people will be disappointed? Some I guess, but not too many, I'll wager, because most of the people I have talked with are just plain "war weary" at this point, and would like to insist that domestic problems be tackled and handled instead! Jobs and infrastructure seem to be the main topics on everyone's mind! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

There's always the pesky little continuing resolution that needs to be dealt with before month's end. :doh Good afternoon pg...
 
CanadaJohn said:
If Assad says yes, it will be years before inspectors actually get organized, get in, etc. and who's to say all the chemical weapons will be rounded up. But if he does say yes, how can Obama and the US then attack? Assad can take the time to try and destroy all opposition.
Click to expand...
Good point. To me, it illustrates how this just a political game to Obama and Assad. Nothing more.
 
polgara said:
Good afternoon, CJ. :2wave:

I wonder how many people will be disappointed? Some I guess, but not too many, I'll wager, because most of the people I have talked with are just plain "war weary" at this point, and would like to insist that domestic problems be tackled and handled instead! Jobs and infrastructure seem to be the main topics on everyone's mind! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Good afternoon Lady P - can't disagree with that - it's only common sense that when your country has so many internal problems the majority of people would like you to focus seriously on those issues and not try to change the channel.
 
Ari said:
Wouldn't it be so anti-climatic if Assad was like "Yeah, sure here ya go" and then everyone just left it at that?
Click to expand...

You meant to say, wouldn't it be nice if president Assad agreed to that and another foolish war was avoided, right?
 
CanadaJohn said:
His Secretary of State, Kerry, put a wrench in the whole process with his stupid remarks today. There is no way that congress will vote for the motion now and no way that anyone else in the international community will join in.

I can't remember a time when American foreign policy was so poorly handled.
Click to expand...

Are you as critical of Canadian foreign policy? Anyway, what was stupid about Kerry's remarks today?
 
CanadaJohn said:
If Assad says yes, it will be years before inspectors actually get organized, get in, etc. and who's to say all the chemical weapons will be rounded up. But if he does say yes, how can Obama and the US then attack? Assad can take the time to try and destroy all opposition.
Click to expand...


CJ! He's fighting his own war on terror, are you really not aware of the atrocities that the Islamic extremist (nice word rebels) are committing in Syria? Assad is willing to surrender his chemical weapons to the international community. It's not in his best interest to use them anyway, and he can smash the terrorists in his country if the rest of us would but out.
 
Montecresto said:
Are you as critical of Canadian foreign policy? Anyway, what was stupid about Kerry's remarks today?
Click to expand...

Actually, I am - I'm disappointed that the Canadian government is supportive of Obama and Kerry in Syria, but I understand why - another case of Canada being a good friend even when that friend acts rashly - I'm also disappointed that the Canadian government still supports the UN, the most useless body known to man. There are other issues, but not relevant to this thread.
 
Montecresto said:
CJ! He's fighting his own war on terror, are you really not aware of the atrocities that the Islamic extremist (nice word rebels) are committing in Syria? Assad is willing to surrender his chemical weapons to the international community. It's not in his best interest to use them anyway, and he can smash the terrorists in his country if the rest of us would but out.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that - since Obama's inattention and ignoring of the situation almost 3 years ago, Syria has devolved into a civil war with many players on many sides. It's the main reason why I oppose international intervention now. But make no mistake, Assad deserves what he's facing since it was his brutal attempts to stop internal voices of reform that caused the extremists to enter Syria and take up the cause. Assad is not a sympathetic figure here, no matter how much you try to make him so.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I don't disagree with that - since Obama's inattention and ignoring of the situation almost 3 years ago, Syria has devolved into a civil war with many players on many sides. It's the main reason why I oppose international intervention now. But make no mistake, Assad deserves what he's facing since it was his brutal attempts to stop internal voices of reform that caused the extremists to enter Syria and take up the cause. Assad is not a sympathetic figure here, no matter how much you try to make him so.
Click to expand...

It's not that I'm making president Assad a sympathetic figure. I don't deny that Syria wasn't run like Canada or France. But it would seem that you deny that he has, according to NATO 70% support of his people. (I think Obama has 40% right now. :) ) as has been pointed out by other posters here multiple times, those people over there don't respond to democracy quite the way that westerners do and they are much more use to autocratic rule. Did you hear a lot of news coming out of Syria before this civil war. Anyway, those types of leaders over there of course are never going to tolerate protests for reform, and when it's tried in countries like Bahrain where we're not interested in "regime change" we stay the hell out of the way and let them smash it down. Saudi Arabia could use its share of reform if you wish to hold ME countries to western standards, but do you think for one minute that the US would be supporting all these same players were they over there doing the same thing? This crap is NOT about humanitarian rescue, its about "US interests" under the guise of humanitarian aid. So I ain't listened to this ****. And you need only look around the region where the US has "intervened" and not in one single case are things better. Is there a week goes by that you don't hear of car bombs somewhere in Iraq? That wasn't going on there when Saddam Hussein was in power.

Here's the deal, if its not too late it could be close to it for Syria. The nasty people the US is supporting will keep that country in chaos and dysfunction that it NEVER saw under president Assad. And if it goes that way, I won't be one of the ones to share any of the blame. I am sick and disgusted with US intervention in that region, sick and tired of those people over there dying to our drone attacks and outright bombings and I will never support our "missions" there, ever! Understand?
 
reinoe said:
What do the rebels deserve?
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the original rebels, the young people and reformers who took to the streets almost 3 years ago to protest the Assad regime and to march for greater democratic and civil liberties, they deserve much better than either Assad or the world gave them. Unfortunately for them, their window of opportunity closed with western inaction and they are now lost in the battle for control of Syria. Their time may come again in the future, but it's no longer their time now.
 
Last edited:
Montecresto said:
It's not that I'm making president Assad a sympathetic figure. I don't deny that Syria wasn't run like Canada or France. But it would seem that you deny that he has, according to NATO 70% support of his people. (I think Obama has 40% right now. :) ) as has been pointed out by other posters here multiple times, those people over there don't respond to democracy quite the way that westerners do and they are much more use to autocratic rule. Did you hear a lot of news coming out of Syria before this civil war. Anyway, those types of leaders over there of course are never going to tolerate protests for reform, and when it's tried in countries like Bahrain where we're not interested in "regime change" we stay the hell out of the way and let them smash it down. Saudi Arabia could use its share of reform if you wish to hold ME countries to western standards, but do you think for one minute that the US would be supporting all these same players were they over there doing the same thing? This crap is NOT about humanitarian rescue, its about "US interests" under the guise of humanitarian aid. So I ain't listened to this ****. And you need only look around the region where the US has "intervened" and not in one single case are things better. Is there a week goes by that you don't hear of car bombs somewhere in Iraq? That wasn't going on there when Saddam Hussein was in power.

Here's the deal, if its not too late it could be close to it for Syria. The nasty people the US is supporting will keep that country in chaos and dysfunction that it NEVER saw under president Assad. And if it goes that way, I won't be one of the ones to share any of the blame. I am sick and disgusted with US intervention in that region, sick and tired of those people over there dying to our drone attacks and outright bombings and I will never support our "missions" there, ever! Understand?
Click to expand...

Not sure why your anger is addressed at me nor why you're lecturing me. In any event, our discussion has run its course - take care and have fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom