• 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!

Is assasination acceptable?

Should we take out Assad?

  • Oh hell yeah...end this mess

    Votes: 2 10.5%

  • No...this makes us no better than he is.

    Votes: 13 68.4%

  • Only if we have the blessing of the Arab League

    Votes: 2 10.5%

  • Tough Call...but someones gotta do SOMETHING!

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • Total voters
    19
I've read from credible sources that Anwar Sadat had a bad experience with assassinations and would be opposed to them if he were still around. JFK probably didn't like assassinations either. I'm just guessing.
 
I have nothing against targeted assassinations, because I'm a pragmatist. Bin Laden's assassination was a-okay with me, and if we can assassinate other Al Qaeda-Taliban leaders anywhere in the world, I'm down with it.

Thing is, one cannot assassinate a government, and the head of state does not a government make.

Sure, someone could take out Assad, but the next-in-command will take his place and the military will be even more brutal with their own version of "Dear Leader" dead. The only thing that makes sense in Syria is for many nations to unite and agree upon a military/humanitarian plan to forceably stop the slaughter. The UN is the perfect place to do that. Unfortunately, Syria has two very good friends in the UN... Russia and China. Syria also has some powerful and friendly neighbors... Iran, and quite possibly Iraq, corrupt cesspool that it still is.

There are simply some things in this world that the USA cannot and should not unilaterally "fix". The Libya thing was iffy for me, but acceptable because France, UK and Spain were leading the charge under NATO's banner, and we provided support. Unless our allies in Europe and the ME are willing to create a coalition with the goal of stopping Assad's carnage and implementing forced regime change on an international level, we should stay the hell out of it and send humanitarian supplies to areas where it's most needed by Syrian victims.
 
00timh said:
Yeah, Obama authorized the operation for the assasinasation of UBL. Haven't heard one complaint against Obama ordering that.....
Click to expand...

Or this......

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has taken the extraordinary step of authorizing the targeted killing of an American citizen, the radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who is believed to have shifted from encouraging attacks on the United States to directly participating in them, intelligence and counterterrorism officials said Tuesday.

Mr. Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico and spent years in the United States as an imam, is in hiding in Yemen. He has been the focus of intense scrutiny since he was linked to Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood, Tex., in November, and then to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man charged with trying to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25.

American counterterrorism officials say Mr. Awlaki is an operative of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the affiliate of the terror network in Yemen and Saudi Arabia. They say they believe that he has become a recruiter for the terrorist network, feeding prospects into plots aimed at the United States and at Americans abroad, the officials said.

It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing, officials said. A former senior legal official in the administration of George W. Bush said he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president.

But the director of national intelligence, Dennis C. Blair, told a House hearing in February that such a step was possible. “We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community,” he said. “If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that.” He did not name Mr. Awlaki as a target.
Click to expand...

U.S. Approves Targeted Killing of American Cleric - NYTimes.com
 
I suppose I am torn on this issue.
On one hand I am terribly disturbed by the slaughter taking place in Syria...and feel someone should stop it.
On the other hand, I do not think it is OUR job to do so with any further violence.
On a third hand, I admit to some level of disdain for the entire culture in the region...to the point that I would just assume we ignored them, and they us.

I guess I feel bad for them, but believe they will keep killing each other for another couple hundred years no matter what we do...It's unlikely 4000 yrs. of brutality will stop simply because one man dies.
 
tecoyah said:
If this situation in Syria, could be dealt with by one of our special forces operations removing certain facets of the problem with deadly force, would you find the tradeoff a wise venture. In other words, if we could kill Assad to stop the ongoing slaughter of thousands, would you go along with it?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. Let's not forget that Syria and Assad allowed millions of Iraqis to seek refuge during our recent invasion and destruction of infrastructure. I didn't see anyone in the USA inviting those refugees over here. I don't believe the press I am reading about the riots and bombings. I think he has the same Islamic fundamentalist problem that all the Arabs have and uses the necessary power to maintain order and leadership. In the MidEast, it takes a dictatorial power type to maintain stability and it appears to me that is what Assad is trying to do. We need look no further than the OCCUPY protests and police crackdowns to see the same thing on our streets. We don't have thousands of fundamentalists with bombs on the loose here, so the scale is reduced, but not all that different. I'm busy today, but later I will look for articles from Turkey, Russia, and maybe Germany to get an objective view on what is happening and compare it to the "Mighty Wurlitzer."
 
Mya said:
You are joking right? you must be ....:lamo


Iran hates nukes! Iran is allergic to nukes! haaaa:lol: ignorance is bliss I guess!:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Someone missed their thorazine dose...
Try to follow my post directly... :roll: instead of attempting to make inference that I am some sortof dolt who thinks Iran Isn't going to get a nuke. You may even know that lots of people are of the conviction that proliferation of nuclear weapons is good as it deters nations from conventional war... and likely half of people who know what they're talking about find nuclear weapons and deterrence to be irrelevant anyways.

As for every point you've made thusfar you happen to be wrong.

Unless you have the secret links to top secret documents that Iran has a nuke :O
Possibly in a nearby coloring book.
 
MKULTRABOY said:
Someone missed their thorazine dose...
Try to follow my post directly... :roll: instead of attempting to make inference that I am some sortof dolt who thinks Iran Isn't going to get a nuke. You may even know that lots of people are of the conviction that proliferation of nuclear weapons is good as it deters nations from conventional war... and likely half of people who know what they're talking about find nuclear weapons and deterrence to be irrelevant anyways.

As for every point you've made thusfar you happen to be wrong.

Unless you have the secret links to top secret documents that Iran has a nuke :O
Possibly in a nearby coloring book.
Click to expand...



I can only go by what the IAEA Report on Iran, with date 8 November 2011, says.




"A Look At The IAEA's Damning Nuclear Report On Iran"
Skipping the details about enrichment, heavy water, and fuel fabrication, we'll highlight the Possible Military Dimensions found in the International Atomic Energy's November 8 report on Iran.

Iran agreed to provide the IAEA "access without delay" to all nuclear sites, since August 2008, Tehran has not "engaged with the [IAEA] in any substantative way on this matter."
IRAN HAS carried out the following acts to produce a nuclear weapon:

Successful efforts to obtain nuclear military equipment
Tried to find undisclosed ways to develop nuclear weapons
Attempted to buy nuclear weapons, development information, and documentation from outside sources, using a "clandestine, nuclear supply network."
Worked on developing an "indigenous" nuclear weapons and components
The above activities took place since 2003 and are believed to be ongoing.




Here is the the official document: Scribd
 
Mya said:
I can only go by what the IAEA Report on Iran, with date 8 November 2011, says.




"A Look At The IAEA's Damning Nuclear Report On Iran"
Skipping the details about enrichment, heavy water, and fuel fabrication, we'll highlight the Possible Military Dimensions found in the International Atomic Energy's November 8 report on Iran.

Iran agreed to provide the IAEA "access without delay" to all nuclear sites, since August 2008, Tehran has not "engaged with the [IAEA] in any substantative way on this matter."
IRAN HAS carried out the following acts to produce a nuclear weapon:

Successful efforts to obtain nuclear military equipment
Tried to find undisclosed ways to develop nuclear weapons
Attempted to buy nuclear weapons, development information, and documentation from outside sources, using a "clandestine, nuclear supply network."
Worked on developing an "indigenous" nuclear weapons and components
The above activities took place since 2003 and are believed to be ongoing.




Here is the the official document: Scribd
Click to expand...


Still ignoring every point in every post made...

Your point made... irrelevant, as Iran does not yet have a nuke.

Carry on.

If they get a nuke, rendering western invasion politically impossible... be sure to check the next flavor of the week as the 'threat' dies away to the next interests of power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom