• 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.....

Looks like someone is scared ****less by the Russkies

It's not as though taking on Russia (and then possibly Iran and China at the same time) would be anything like taking on Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi!
 
Obama subscribes to "Workers World."

Good morning, APACHERAT. :2wave:

WHY? To gauge how well they're doing while working two or three part time jobs just to make ends meet? :shrug: :yawn:
 
Obama is Putin's puppet. Obama has been down grated by Moody and now he is down graded as the US supper power to substandard status in the world. Russia and Iran and the rest of the museum world is now the supper power in the word and we suck it up. All due to Obama and his mission to down grade the US any way he can.

Heya BF :2wave: .....LTNS, How ya been bro?


Yeah, well Putin definitely has him dancing with the String Theories now. ;)
 
These S-300 SAM's aren't good news for Israel. These upgraded S-300's air defense missiles will be able to shoot down aircraft over Israel.

What's also significant about these missiles, they are equal to our Patriot SAM's and can shoot down Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Have to do a little searching to find out what kind of land launch anti ship missiles that Syria has recently received.

Russia suspends delivery of S-300 missile systems to Syria | JPost | Israel News

Update, 2 hours ago:
Report: Russia Transferred S-300s into Syria - Middle East - News - Israel National News


Heya Apache. :2wave: Yeah I know.....plus they set up and take down in less then 5 mins.

Israel will now need to worry if the Russians give Iran those type of weapons. Thing is Putin did this while still playing the Syrian slant.

Course the other concern here for Israel is Iran being able to Sabre Rattle over the ability.

Iran had best think very serious like.....if they even send one Cruise Missile Israel's way. As their destruction will be assured then.
 
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.

Heya Fisher :2wave: .....well there is one difference. Assad is more popular with the youth and younger people than his father was.
 
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.

Heya Beaudreax. :2wave: Putin played it well. As he knew it would take troops on the ground, as well as that the West would not trust Russia to go in and stockpile and destroy. Which means NATO troops on the ground and in that War Zone with Rebels/ Terrorists. Getting to see first hand just what they are doing. While having to defend themselves. Be a good year if not more.
 
Heya Fisher :2wave: .....well there is one difference. Assad is more popular with the youth and younger people than his father was.

Realistically, except for syria's principled refusal to acknowledge Israel getting in the way, it is probably the only Arab country in the region that had pro-west possibilities because of its government's secular nature. Law and order has traditionally been the only real focus of the government.
 
Heya Apache. :2wave: Yeah I know.....plus they set up and take down in less then 5 mins.

Israel will now need to worry if the Russians give Iran those type of weapons. Thing is Putin did this while still playing the Syrian slant.

Course the other concern here for Israel is Iran being able to Sabre Rattle over the ability.

Iran had best think very serious like.....if they even send one Cruise Missile Israel's way. As their destruction will be assured then.

Re: Israel and Syria I heard one annalist say that they know who they are dealing with with Assad in power. With the radical Islamist rebels they don't know what to expect if they were to take political control of Syria.

But one scenario is, if and or when Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities and Assad is still in power, Iran's retaliation against Israel will be launched from Syria.

As we have witnessed over the past few years, Obama has supported overthrowing American allies and supporting Islamist radicals which include the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda. As the Washington Times reported the other day that the CIA has confirmed that Al Qaeda has expanded under the Obama administration and that Al Qaeda terrorist attacks have increased under the Obama administration. But Obama lied to the American people to get reelected by proclaiming that it was all about a Youtube video and that Al Qaeda was on the run and being decimated when the truth was it's a complete opposite.

Where ever Obama has inserted his failed foreign policies we see the results like in Egypt, Libya, etc.
 
How do you know he "folded", be will probably get more help from Putin in lieu of the weapons.

Well.....we got the facts now with how the Syria issue played out. Which shows all that bipartisanship in opposing the Striking of Syria.

Diane Feinstein said it best.....when she said she hoped that the International Community Would contribute and invest in Syria. Pretty much saying. . Go and handle it then. We will support ya.
 
Good point

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

Heya Sangha. :2wave: So whats the excuse for what was said about the Chems 2 years ago.....wherein the main concern was AQ or likes could get their hands on them?

Which they did......then used them.

Even traitors and defectors of the Assad regime and are part of the FSA have stated that Assad could not stop AQ or their likes from taking certain chem facilities. That Assad doesn't have the forces to cover them.

2 years ago......Chems in the hand of Terrorists was the terminology used. The Major concern of All. How do you think that plays out as an excuse now, knowing all along that Assad couldn't stop them from taking Chems? When the Brits and French knew that Rebels/ Terrorists had used Chems or were attacking in an area with a Chemical facility.....Where was the Call to Strike? to go and get those Chems?
 
Re: Israel and Syria I heard one annalist say that they know who they are dealing with with Assad in power. With the radical Islamist rebels they don't know what to expect if they were to take political control of Syria.

But one scenario is, if and or when Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities and Assad is still in power, Iran's retaliation against Israel will be launched from Syria.

As we have witnessed over the past few years, Obama has supported overthrowing American allies and supporting Islamist radicals which include the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda. As the Washington Times reported the other day that the CIA has confirmed that Al Qaeda has expanded under the Obama administration and that Al Qaeda terrorist attacks have increased under the Obama administration. But Obama lied to the American people to get reelected by proclaiming that it was all about a Youtube video and that Al Qaeda was on the run and being decimated when the truth was it's a complete opposite.

Where ever Obama has inserted his failed foreign policies we see the results like in Egypt, Libya, etc.


Yeah, I know I saw ya thread on the Stratfor Assessment......which I threw up a couple of others in there for you to check out.

I would agree Obama has been part of that Neo Con and Neo Lib agenda.....the Neos- me, me, and more me, then that NWO citizen of the World BS.

Its not just Obama.....its the Damn French too. they are the ones filing for Enforceable Action in the UN. They have done so with 5 different countries. In Which they haven't handled not one adventure all to their little lonesome selves.
 
Heya Sangha. :2wave: So whats the excuse for what was said about the Chems 2 years ago.....wherein the main concern was AQ or likes could get their hands on them?

Which they did......then used them.

Even traitors and defectors of the Assad regime and are part of the FSA have stated that Assad could not stop AQ or their likes from taking certain chem facilities. That Assad doesn't have the forces to cover them.

2 years ago......Chems in the hand of Terrorists was the terminology used. The Major concern of All. How do you think that plays out as an excuse now, knowing all along that Assad couldn't stop them from taking Chems? When the Brits and French knew that Rebels/ Terrorists had used Chems or were attacking in an area with a Chemical facility.....Where was the Call to Strike? to go and get those Chems?

If you want me to answer that, you'll have to first translate that into english
 
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.

We should replace Obama with Bullwinkle if we wanna hand Boris his a$$. Next POTUS will be Billary Clinton and her sidekick will probably be Kerry. While we may not love DNC's platform or even love Bubba's wife; I think she knows how to play hardball on the world stage. I'm guessing on the GOP side, if those skydaddy god squad loons know what's good for them they will pony up to the bar with Jim Christie and maybe Rand Paul for VP. Otherwise they won't have a shot againt Billary-Kerry if they come up with another combo like Brigham Young and Lyin' Ryan.
 
I just saw something on AP that sounds like this Russia plan is going to fall through. Is Assad doing one of those "we will get around to it someday" deals like how Iran always drags everything out and then blows it off? North Korea pulls that crap all the time too. I guess Assad is learning how to play this game.

Kerry rejects Assad's 30-day timetable

Kerry rejects Assad's 30-day timetable

GENEVA (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is rejecting Syrian President Bashar Assad's (bah-SHAR' AH'-sahd) suggestion he begin submitting data on his chemical weapons arsenal one month after signing an international chemical weapons ban.
Kerry spoke at a news conference Thursday with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov (SEHR'-gay LAHV'-rahf). Kerry noted Assad said a 30-day lead time would be standard.
Kerry said, quote, "there is nothing standard about this process" because Assad used chemical weapons. Kerry said the Syrian regime's words are not enough.
Kerry cautions that a U.S. military strike could happen if Assad doesn't agree to dismantle his chemical arsenal properly.
 
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.
Of course not.
As for nuclear reactors--those are unavoidable. Persia will run out of oil before it runs out of people and they need the electricity.
And I wouldn't have a problem with civilian use reactors. But Iran has tens of thousands of centrifuges running full blast right now according to the IAEA. That has nothing to do with civilian use. Their excuse of "medical" use for the enriched material is bogus. They could get that material from their buddies Russia or China, and it could be tracked by the IAEA. But no. They want their own nuclear program, which can be easily be utilized for fissile material production, and that's why they are refusing full IAEA inspections or monitoring.
 
Realistically, except for syria's principled refusal to acknowledge Israel getting in the way, it is probably the only Arab country in the region that had pro-west possibilities because of its government's secular nature. Law and order has traditionally been the only real focus of the government.

It's a matter of money.

Russia supports the Assad regime. We do not. If we had supported Assad, like we did Mubarak, then Iran wouldn't have a partner/conduit against Israel, and the US would have had a secular partner that would have helped us fight Al Qaeda. But no. We had to make them the "enemy" because of their relationship with Russia and their support of Saddam, and so on.

Again, it's a matter of money. In international relations, money is the binding force of friendships, not ideologies.
 
If you want me to answer that, you'll have to first translate that into english

Ah I see.....you need things in a more simplified and simpleton like way. NP! :mrgreen: So then lets make it real simple and easy like for ya. Something so easy that even a Gomer Pyle would know. Either that.....or it just shows you have no clue as to what you are talking about. Lets leave that on you.

Now whats your lame excuses over the Chems and what was said two years ago about them by, none other than that Team Obama you like to Pontificate for.

Now.....don't let the simplified and easy get you all Cornfullezed. As I wouldn't want many saying I took advantage of you, Again! ;)
 
We should replace Obama with Bullwinkle if we wanna hand Boris his a$$. Next POTUS will be Billary Clinton and her sidekick will probably be Kerry. While we may not love DNC's platform or even love Bubba's wife; I think she knows how to play hardball on the world stage. I'm guessing on the GOP side, if those skydaddy god squad loons know what's good for them they will pony up to the bar with Jim Christie and maybe Rand Paul for VP. Otherwise they won't have a shot againt Billary-Kerry if they come up with another combo like Brigham Young and Lyin' Ryan.

Are the left that stupid to run another second rate lefty as President like Hillary ? I suppose it all depends how misinformed or uninformed the voters will remain in 2016. Hillary was a failed Secretary of State. But she's not a narcissist like Obama so she might surround herself with competent people. But I doubt she has the leadership capabilities of being able to reach across the aisle so Congress actually accomplish something.

I doubt the GOP would actually run a conservative, at least they haven't in the past twenty five years.

If the liberals are right that the GOP has moved so far to the right, then the GOP must be full of reactionaries. If true they are doing a pretty damn good of a job hiding.

The GOP should run a reactionary for President running on a platform of repealing every piece of legislation that has been passed by Congress since 2001 that has taken away our individual freedoms, disbanding the Dept. of Homeland Security and reinstating every member of the military who have been relieved of their commands or forced out of the service because they weren't politically correct enough for Obama's liking. Repealing NAFTA should also be a priority along with a 1,000 % tariff on any garbage that is imported into America. Americans have to go back demanding quality not cheap stuff.

The question is, are there any reactionaries in America any more ? The liberals claim that the GOP has moved so far to the right, if true where are they ?

Actually I think the Democrat Party has actually moved so far to the left that conservatives look to be the extreme. Pat Buchanan's political ideology is the same today as it was back in 1970 and Pat was looked at being a conservative moderate.

What the Libertarians should do is exactly what the JFK liberals did during the 1970's, coming under the GOP tent who created a new label to stand behind, neoconservatives. They actually were able to gain control of the GOP during the 1990's and hold onto power until 2010. The Libertarians could do the same thing. The GOP is the party of diversity where everyone is allowed to have dissenting views not like the Democrat Party where everyone is in goose stepping locksteps and dissenting views are forbidden.
 
Are the left that stupid to run another second rate lefty as President like Hillary ? I suppose it all depends how misinformed or uninformed the voters will remain in 2016. Hillary was a failed Secretary of State. But she's not a narcissist like Obama so she might surround herself with competent people. But I doubt she has the leadership capabilities of being able to reach across the aisle so Congress actually accomplish something.

I doubt the GOP would actually run a conservative, at least they haven't in the past twenty five years.

If the liberals are right that the GOP has moved so far to the right, then the GOP must be full of reactionaries. If true they are doing a pretty damn good of a job hiding.

The GOP should run a reactionary for President running on a platform of repealing every piece of legislation that has been passed by Congress since 2001 that has taken away our individual freedoms, disbanding the Dept. of Homeland Security and reinstating every member of the military who have been relieved of their commands or forced out of the service because they weren't politically correct enough for Obama's liking. Repealing NAFTA should also be a priority along with a 1,000 % tariff on any garbage that is imported into America. Americans have to go back demanding quality not cheap stuff.

The question is, are there any reactionaries in America any more ? The liberals claim that the GOP has moved so far to the right, if true where are they ?

Actually I think the Democrat Party has actually moved so far to the left that conservatives look to be the extreme. Pat Buchanan's political ideology is the same today as it was back in 1970 and Pat was looked at being a conservative moderate.

What the Libertarians should do is exactly what the JFK liberals did during the 1970's, coming under the GOP tent who created a new label to stand behind, neoconservatives. They actually were able to gain control of the GOP during the 1990's and hold onto power until 2010. The Libertarians could do the same thing. The GOP is the party of diversity where everyone is allowed to have dissenting views not like the Democrat Party where everyone is in goose stepping locksteps and dissenting views are forbidden.

The Libertarian Party is fine and dandy and doesn't need to hide under the umbrella of a bunch of people that think that every animal on the planet was within walking distance of Noah's house. What does need to happen is that these people blowing billions on Super PAC's need to wake up and realize the best horse to back for a healthy USA is the Libertarian Party. If your idea about a sub group had any traction at all the Tea Party would have moved front and center. Maybe you could blame that on Juggs Palin being nothing but a porn star that picked the wrong profession; but I really think the GOP just cannot facilitate dissenting ideas. Bottom line is DNC knows how to whoop GOP's collective a$$ and America is just stupid enough to follow those two pathetic platforms into third world ruin.
 
It's a matter of money.

Russia supports the Assad regime. We do not. If we had supported Assad, like we did Mubarak, then Iran wouldn't have a partner/conduit against Israel, and the US would have had a secular partner that would have helped us fight Al Qaeda. But no. We had to make them the "enemy" because of their relationship with Russia and their support of Saddam, and so on.

Again, it's a matter of money. In international relations, money is the binding force of friendships, not ideologies.

Like I always say, Russia had first pick and now we have to pick the useless fat kid in the corner eating his grape icee. Either we pick Al Qaeda or we don't get to make any coin on the misery in Syria.
 
Like I always say, Russia had first pick and now we have to pick the useless fat kid in the corner eating his grape icee. Either we pick Al Qaeda or we don't get to make any coin on the misery in Syria.

Heya Snappo.....I say we stay out of it and choose neither side. See who rises to the cream of the crop. Then we know who is who. Focus on Egypt.

Let the Europeans Send in NATO troops if someone has to have boots on the ground to go after these Chems.

All this time is taking place. Allowing Assad to get in more shipments of Weapons from Russia. Set his defenses. Already he has things moved up into civilian neighborhoods. That's despite Putin and the Russians denying that they are sending weapons. According to the Kuwaitis' they have it up in their news which if we have any people there they can validate. They are saying that Russians have been moving the S300s into Syria since Aug 21.

The Kuwaiti newspaper al Rai reported Tuesday that Russia recently transferred a number of advanced S-300 missile defense batteries to Syria. The report said since Aug. 21, when hundreds of Syrian civilians were killed in a chemical weapons attack by the Syrian regime, Russia has accelerated shipments of arms to President Bashar Assad's regime....snip~

Russian President Putin says 5 missile batteries to be sent to Iran - UPI.com
 
The Libertarian Party is fine and dandy and doesn't need to hide under the umbrella of a bunch of people that think that every animal on the planet was within walking distance of Noah's house. What does need to happen is that these people blowing billions on Super PAC's need to wake up and realize the best horse to back for a healthy USA is the Libertarian Party. If your idea about a sub group had any traction at all the Tea Party would have moved front and center. Maybe you could blame that on Juggs Palin being nothing but a porn star that picked the wrong profession; but I really think the GOP just cannot facilitate dissenting ideas. Bottom line is DNC knows how to whoop GOP's collective a$$ and America is just stupid enough to follow those two pathetic platforms into third world ruin.

I wasn't suggesting that the Libertarians hide behind a label but that they openly stand behind their political ideology like those in the Tea Party movement have. It was the Tea Party movement who knocked the neoconservatives from power within the GOP. The only problem today, no one is in charge of the GOP since the mid term elections of 2010.

You're going to find more Americans under the GOP tent who have more in common with the Libertarian Party than you will under the Democrat tent, that's for sure. There's no place for individual freedoms under the Democrat tent.

Of all of the diffrent political parties that have a platform, I'm more aligned with the Constitution Party.

But the problem with most political parties they write up a platform every four years and then they ignore it.
 
Well Kerry ended up fumbling the ball.....playing to the camera and getting all Emotional like. Then his mouth overloaded his brain. What makes it all the worse....is him chilling out and then Getting that call from Lavrov. Telling him.
nono.gif
I heard you and not only did I hear what you said.....While in amazement that you said it. But Now I am making announcement Mr Secretary. You Might want to tune in and turn the volume up. :doh


So Kerry made a rhetorical statement that not even he believed would ever happen....and then while on the plane trip home he gets a call from Lavrov saying that Putin will be making an announcement soon and by the time he lands Syria has agreed to let the international community monitor their chemical weapons stockpile? That is remarkable.


"...When Kerry was asked if Assad could do anything to avoid an attack, he uttered 20 words that set off a rapid chain of events.

"Sure," he said. "He can turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week."

He raised both arms for emphasis and continued: "Turn it over, all of it, without delay, and allow a full and total accounting for that. But he isn't about to do it, and it can't be done, obviously."

On the flight home, Kerry, now in a faded orange zip-up sweatshirt, spoke on the phone with Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. Lavrov told Kerry he had heard his comments in London and Russia was getting ready to make an announcement.

By the time Kerry landed in the U.S., Russia had made its proposal to place Syrian chemical weapons out of Assad's control, Syria had welcomed the idea, other nations and the United Nations had embraced it in principle, and some members of Congress were beginning to see a possible way out of the jam. Kerry's staff initially suggested that the secretary's words were merely a rhetorical flourish. But by the end of the day, though expressing deep skepticism, Obama declared the Russian pitch "potentially a significant breakthrough" that could head off U.S. air strikes....."


If Syria gives up control over it's chemical weapons, then Obama won't have to attack. That looks like a winning solution for the US, imo.
 
Back
Top Bottom