View Poll Results: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

Voters
130. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    1 0.77%
  • No

    110 84.62%
  • Yes, but only Special Forces troops

    6 4.62%
  • No. Maybe in the future.

    13 10.00%
Page 8 of 24 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 231

Thread: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

  1. #71
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 07:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,730

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    Where did that work?
    I don't know, the situation is Iran was remarkably improved in the long term by overthrowing its last democratically elected leader......no wait.

  2. #72
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    No, we shouldn't. We have plenty of problems at home to deal with.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  3. #73
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    I think this is the most lopsided poll I've ever seen on this forum.
    “Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

  4. #74
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 07:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,730

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by lizzie View Post
    No. Period. Never. We have been trying to police the freaking world and turn dictatorships into democracies for far too many years, with far too many of our own soldiers' lives, for people who aren't culturally adapted to western-style democracy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Red_Dave View Post
    *bangs head on table*
    Upon reflection I've decided that I could have reflected expressed myself more eloquently. I feel this presents a fundamentally inaccurate summation of the past century, which has more accurately been characterized by the West intervening to prevent democracy in the region, as per my example of Iran, French activity in Syria and the huge rise in military aid given to Arab governments after the war on terror. All we need to do to encourage democracy in the region is to get out of the way.

  5. #75
    Professor
    Kane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    09-09-13 @ 09:13 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,661

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    CNN’s Anderson Cooper activates ‘Operation Mockingbird’ in Egypt


    CNN’s Anderson Cooper activates ‘Operation Mockingbird’ in Egypt « 21st Century Wire

    "Smelled any proverbial rats lately? If not, you have not been paying attention. There are plenty about."

    "Consider, for instance, this:

    “Assad must halt his campaign of killing and crimes against his own people now” and “must step aside …” Hilary Clinton (Asia Times, February 9, 2012)


    “I strongly condemn the Syrian government’s unspeakable assault … and I offer my deepest sympathy to those who have lost loved ones. Assad must halt his campaign of killing and crimes against his own people now. He must step aside …” said President Barack Hussein Obama.

    Yet responsibility for US victims, in their hundreds of thousands, spanning Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, in Guantanamo, Bagram, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere, are wholly unaccountable — and uncounted.“

    Syria: Rogue Elements Rampant | Dissident Voice

    Amnesty International Propaganda Targets Russia & Syria - BlackListedNews.com

    http://www.blacklistednews.com/US_At...38/38/Y/M.html
    Last edited by Kane; 04-24-12 at 06:48 PM.

  6. #76
    Professor
    Kane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    09-09-13 @ 09:13 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,661
    Last edited by Kane; 04-24-12 at 06:54 PM.

  7. #77
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    It seems like the criteria for invading a country is becoming twofold.

    1. Has weapons vaguely comparable to ours, though still no possible chance of standing up to us in a fight.

    2. Is predominantly a religion that isn't the predominant one here whose God demands they use those weapons on us.

    I wonder how we'd feel about North Korea if they were a primarily Christian country...
    Fixed that for you

  8. #78
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    It is because every time we go to war sort of instead of really going to war, it turns out badly
    really? every time? I must have missed the Libya quagmire. My history book must have censored out the years we spent losing men in Panama. Apparently Google is in on the conspiracy as well, because I can't find a single thing about the long, ugly, failed occupation of Grenada. In Bosnia, where we found ourselves outnumbered, and surrounded. I still remember the shame I felt when we were forced to retreat from that fierce land.

    However, the 1991 campaign was a pretty rocking success, so clearly we Officially Declare War there, right?


    We've been pretty successfully putting into place this precise strategy in Pakistan for years. You are reacting emotionally rather than rationally.

  9. #79
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    I am so tired of the "facilitating terrorism" reason that is used as justification to invade these countries. If this was the case, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and numerous other countries should be invaded first. When is our government going to stop squeezing the water balloon and just leave these people alone? The more we meddle in the middle east, the worse it gets for us. I'm not saying a POTUS should apologize for anything we have done in the past. But one thing our next POTUS should do is admit our policies of meddling in every skirmish we can, providing money to rulers we "like", buying weapons for rebel groups, were wrong and will not be carried out anymore. There isn't one example of us funding a rebel group that has been a lasting success. It provides short term gains at the expense of long term integrity.
    We are in agreement.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  10. #80
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by Crossroads View Post
    Its fairly well established that Iran would not use nuclear weapons against anybody, because they know they would be utterly destroyed in the retaliation strike.
    that is incorrect. Iran is immune to counterstrike because Allah requires that the Holy City of Qom be held pristine for the upcoming return of the 13th Imam, whom He hid centuries ago and who He will bring out to lead the Shia into their Glorious Future as soon as Israel is destroyed. So, you see, the Ayatollah's have a trump card.

    And what, exactly, makes you think that the government of Iran has control over all of it's people? The IRGC doesn't play well with the Ayatollahs, who doesn't play well with the President, who doesn't play well with the Majles, who doesn't play well with themselves. Figuring out Iranian foreign policy is a nightmare not least because Iran does not have a single entity making foreign - policy decisions.

    Their want to survive will override any religious bull****.
    What a cute assumption. I'm glad you are willing to bet millions of other people's lives and families on it. You do realize that their particular brand of Islam (and in fact, them) are the ones who were the genesis of the modern suicide bomber? Al-Qaeda learned that crap from them.

    The only threat that is possible would be a Iran shifting off one of its nukes to a rouge unit that could use it, without it coming back to bite Iran in the ass.
    Gosh. I wonder if any such unit is housed inside of the IRGC, which controls the Iranian Nuclear program? I wonder if that force has a established history of enabling murderous psychos and terror networks who commit suicide attacks on the Americans.

    But, like I said, you have numerous anti Israeli and anti American countries, who are in possession of nuclear weapons, and we have yet to see a nuclear attack on either us or Israel.
    We have Pakistan, whose leadership is secular, and whose nuclear facilities are constantly under threat from seizure, and which would go to the Taliban if that rickety government were to fall.

    Once a technology is out there like that, it is virtually impossible to shut everybody else out from it, if they want it bad enough, by stopping Iran today form attaining nuclear weapons, you would only be slowing down the inevitable.
    Not at all. The current Iranian regime is going to have a tough time retaining it's nature and power in the coming decades as the Revolutionary generation fades, and the Green generation rises. Regardless, the fact that I will certainly die in the next 80 years is no reason for me to fail to step out of the way of a speeding car today.

    Thats the reality of the situation. If we wanted to use economic sanctions, computer hacking, or even small special forces to slow this process down, I'm all for it, but if Iran wants to get nuclear weapons, the only way to really stop them, is to utterly destroy them.
    meh, not really. Precise targeting of key infrastructure can set them back for years, and you can significantly harm their economy as well, making it exceedingly difficult for them to make up the lost ground. all those physicists and bunkers cost money.

    and if thats your plan, then you'd better get ready to go after every other nuclear holding country that is a heavy islamist state as well as anti Israeli. an option, which is not an option at all.
    Such as..... Pakistan? I am ready to bomb them as well, if it seems likely that those facilities are about to fall into the nutjob hands.

Page 8 of 24 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •