• 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!

How the Syria Plan Broke Through, Just in Time.....

Fisher said:
I believe he probably has the support of the majority of the people. American elites in the media or otherwise are always blinded by some idealistic notion of democracy. Syria has always been a place that required an iron fist and there really is nothing different about the current Assad from the previous one except that the US no longer likes that they have a secular autocracy. Syria often has been blamed for things that originated in Iran by my measure at least.
Click to expand...

Good morning, Fisher. :2wave:


Excellent post, and a very interesting, thought-provoking observation! :thumbs:
 
Beaudreaux said:
All this is, and will prove out to be, is a delay on the part of Russia to help Assad save his own butt.

Why do I say that? Simple actually. There's no way the UN or anyone else can secure those chemical weapons in the middle of an active war zone. Even if it wasn't a war zone (with people shooting whatever moved and dropping artillery and mortar shells everywhere) it would take months to identify and inventory the weapons, and YEARS to stabilize, transport and dispose of them.

In other words, this proposal is a made for TV movie, and not reality. It gives Obama the out from the corner he backed himself into ("damn, you mean they crossed the Red Line? Uh, I mean... what Red Line?) and it gives Russia the ability to give Assad time to regroup and more than likely survive.

And that's only if they can get the opposition forces to agree. Last I heard, no one had asked them what they thought about all this. My guess is, they don't care what Obama says at this point, since they can't rely on him telling the truth or following through with what he does say, and they damn sure don't care what Putin, or Iran, or anyone else says either.

They didn't get into this fight over chemical weapons. They protested against Assad during the Arab Spring, Assad attacked them, and they fought back.

None of that has changed.
Click to expand...

Excellent! :thumbs: It will now be seen what the next chapter in this saga brings.

Good morning, Beadreaux! :2wave:
 
Beaudreaux said:
All this is, and will prove out to be, is a delay on the part of Russia to help Assad save his own butt.

Why do I say that? Simple actually. There's no way the UN or anyone else can secure those chemical weapons in the middle of an active war zone. Even if it wasn't a war zone (with people shooting whatever moved and dropping artillery and mortar shells everywhere) it would take months to identify and inventory the weapons, and YEARS to stabilize, transport and dispose of them.

In other words, this proposal is a made for TV movie, and not reality. It gives Obama the out from the corner he backed himself into ("damn, you mean they crossed the Red Line? Uh, I mean... what Red Line?) and it gives Russia the ability to give Assad time to regroup and more than likely survive.

And that's only if they can get the opposition forces to agree. Last I heard, no one had asked them what they thought about all this. My guess is, they don't care what Obama says at this point, since they can't rely on him telling the truth or following through with what he does say, and they damn sure don't care what Putin, or Iran, or anyone else says either.

They didn't get into this fight over chemical weapons. They protested against Assad during the Arab Spring, Assad attacked them, and they fought back.

None of that has changed.
Click to expand...

I'm sure when Putin heard John Kerry offer that president Assad could avoid a US attack on his country by turning his chemical weapons over to the international community on Sunday morning from London, he immediately called Assad and told him to jump on it. Assad can't use them anyway, it would be the quickest way to bring on the wrath of the world and cost him his support from China and Russia. And his conventional weaponry is sufficient for him to crush the terrorists operating within his borders, if, IF, the US would stop arming, training, supplying and otherwise giving material aid to those extremists. If not, then we can expect an extended civil war and death tolls to continue to rise.
 
And I just want to repeat this again. The US secured a resolution from the UN to use military force in Libya to protect civilians. That resolution had the support of China and Russia. But, that resolution was abused by the US to go on the offensive against Gaddafi's forces weakening them to the point that they collapsed and the government was overthrown. Whether anybody here likes it or not, China and Russia were pissed by that, felt betrayed and subsequently both vowed not to allow this same thing to happen in Syria. That would be why they have blocked all attempts at the UN for sanctions, no fly zones and use of military force. Then because of that they have watched the US and its ally's covertly due what they were denied the ability to do overtly. So, they are still pissed, they see the US handwringing about civilians as disingenuous, and "regime change" as the true motivating factor. And indeed, that has been a Pentagon goal for at least two decades. So, China and Russia being on the right side of this one, and refusing to budge has the US between a rock and a hard spot that would be a difficult situation for any president to handle. President Assad would have rather easily suppressed the rebels early on and we wouldn't even be talking about this today if the US would have done the right thing at the beginning.
 
It's funny to watch how some people are trying to spin the Obama administrations successful effort to disarm the Syrians of their chem weapons as a bad thing.
 
sangha said:
It's funny to watch how some people are trying to spin the Obama administrations successful effort to disarm the Syrians of their chem weapons as a bad thing.
Click to expand...


That wouldn't be me. I'm all about it, especially sense that's what this administration said president Assad could do to prevent a US attack!
 
Montecresto said:
That wouldn't be me. I'm all about it, especially sense that's what this administration said president Assad could do to prevent a US attack!
Click to expand...

Exactly!

Just yesterday, the haters were wailing about how Obama was making the US look weak for making threats he couldn't back up. Now that Assad has completely folded on chem weapons, they are flailing about trying to find a reason to argue that giving up his chem weapons is a bad thing for the US.

It's pretty funny
 
The US should never agree to conditions of "guaranteeing to not using force" on this issue. Of course Assad and Putin readily propose to remove chemical weapons from Syria, even though that is almost impossible to do in a civil war, because as one poster pointed out, Syria is winning the conventional war and will continue to do so with help from Iran and Russia. Hope Kerry has enough sense to keep military force on the table, regardless of any of Putin's proposals.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Selling S300's to Iran should be enough to get sanctions against Russia. All that would do is bolster Iran's ability to defy the existing UN Resolutions against them by making air raids almost too dangerous. In fact, given Obama's predilection to be anti-military action, the presence of S300's would make him lock slam up and never give the order.

Iran... the new nuclear power and terrorist weapon flea market.
Click to expand...

Do you think Russia and China are going to support sanctions against Russia for selling weapons? It is big business and won't be stopped. As for nuclear reactors--those are unavoidable. Persia will run out of oil before it runs out of people and they need the electricity.
 
sangha said:
Exactly!

Just yesterday, the haters were wailing about how Obama was making the US look weak for making threats he couldn't back up. Now that Assad has completely folded on chem weapons, they are flailing about trying to find a reason to argue that giving up his chem weapons is a bad thing for the US.

It's pretty funny
Click to expand...

Yes, except that war with Syria is the alternative, and THAT is not funny, as I'm sure you agree.
 
Mizmo said:
The US should never agree to conditions of "guaranteeing to not using force" on this issue. Of course Assad and Putin readily propose to remove chemical weapons from Syria, even though that is almost impossible to do in a civil war, because as one poster pointed out, Syria is winning the conventional war and will continue to do so with help from Iran and Russia. Hope Kerry has enough sense to keep military force on the table, regardless of any of Putin's proposals.
Click to expand...


It was offered as an escape from any US attack. NOW, the US needs to keep its word. If that's even possible.
 
APACHERAT said:
Putin probably actually plays chess while Obama plays checkers with Malia and Natasha and loses most of the time.

You have to be street wise with dealing with Putin. He's a street thug (X-KGB) and like most thugs they want respect they haven't earned. When dealing with Putin you have to have perpetual vision or Putin will cold **** you when your not expecting it.

Where as Obama was given the benefit of doubt in the beginning and shown the respect he never earned and soon it was obvious, Obama wasn't ready for the major leagues.
Click to expand...
Hope Obama dont read the NYT.
 
sangha said:
And the haters will complain that we're not at war with Syria.

Just give them some time
Click to expand...
Who on here is hating that we are not at war with Syria. The only poll about it is running around 87% against.
 
sangha said:
Exactly!

Just yesterday, the haters were wailing about how Obama was making the US look weak for making threats he couldn't back up. Now that Assad has completely folded on chem weapons, they are flailing about trying to find a reason to argue that giving up his chem weapons is a bad thing for the US.

It's pretty funny
Click to expand...
How do you know he "folded", be will probably get more help from Putin in lieu of the weapons.
 
sangha said:
My bad

I forgot that Assad attacked his own citizens because he wanted to give up his chem weapons! :roll:
Click to expand...
Putin is still of the opinion that the attack is a hoax or the rebels did it themselves.
Lets see, who is more believeable. Putin or Obama. Hmmm tough call.
You really think Assad is going to disarm? You think Putin is going to spend the millions do correctly destroy said weapons?
Weapons that are now probably being stored in the basements of Syrians homes and places of worship.
I think you are buying the lie hook line and sinker.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Putin is still of the opinion that the attack is a hoax or the rebels did it themselves.
Lets see, who is more believeable. Putin or Obama. Hmmm tough call.
You really think Assad is going to disarm? You think Putin is going to spend the millions do correctly destroy said weapons?
Weapons that are now probably being stored in the basements of Syrians homes and places of worship.
I think you are buying the lie hook line and sinker.
Click to expand...

Assad has agreed to give up his chem weapons.

How awful!! :lamo
 
CRUE CAB said:
Agreed with his main ally. Not anything we did or threatened to do was he really afraid of.
Click to expand...

Good point

I'm sure that giving up his chem weapons was something Assad was planning to do from the very beginning!
 
sangha said:
Good point

I'm sure that giving up his chem weapons was something Assad was planning to do from the very beginning!
Click to expand...

I doubt it was and I doubt he will. You know Putin in patting him on the head telling he will take care of the Americans.
"Dont you worry little buddy, long as we have our naval base in your country. I wont let anyone push you around".
 
CRUE CAB said:
I doubt it was and I doubt he will. You know Putin in patting him on the head telling he will take care of the Americans.
"Dont you worry little buddy, long as we have our naval base in your country. I wont let anyone push you around".
Click to expand...

If doesn't disarm then:

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:[2][3]
Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."
Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
Click to expand...
 
CRUE CAB said:
If we actually go to war with Syria, it will be our undoing.
I think Putin is actually giving us all the warning he can without telling Obama, "fire and you will be at war with Russia".
Click to expand...

Looks like someone is scared ****less by the Russkies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom