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 9 of 24 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 231

Thread: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

  1. #81
    Advisor Crossroads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    07-06-15 @ 05:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    408
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    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.



    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.



    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.



    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.



    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.



    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.



    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.

    Ok, I see your points, I'm not going to continue arguing just for the sake of arguing. So we have numerous unstable situations regarding the possession of nuclear weapons, (Include N.K. in there as well) where the outcome is not certain, except it will probably be less than what would be desirable. There are some in this area of expertise who classify Iran as a rational actor, but even if that was true, their government is still on rocky ground, at best and their leadership is as unstable as it gets. Creating nuclear weapons can't be an easy task, it would seem like a possibility to rely on special ops, and more covert means to keep them from obtaining a nuclear weapon. If not that, then if negotiations fail, and Iran refuses inspections by the UN, then the UN and its most powerful members, should get together, and deal with it with a strong, concentrated military force. And if the Pakistan problem is as bad as you say, it seems something similar would need to happen there as well.

  2. #82
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    I'm fine with everything you say, up until the point about the UN. Given that Russia and China both have veto power, and are backing Iran, what makes you think that the UN would be able to accomplish anything?

  3. #83
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,547

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    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.
    We sent some planes in to Libya, and then got out. We destroyed a part of a city in Panama, and then got out. We attacked Granada and then got out. We sent Saddam packing in '91, and then got out. Is that what you're suggesting in Syria, or do you see another protracted nation building and winning hearts and minds fiasco?

    and what, exactly, did we gain in Panama and Granada?
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  4. #84
    Advisor Crossroads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    07-06-15 @ 05:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    408
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    I'm fine with everything you say, up until the point about the UN. Given that Russia and China both have veto power, and are backing Iran, what makes you think that the UN would be able to accomplish anything?
    Thats more of a "what should be happening". I would think both China and Russia wouldn't like an Iranian nuclear strike anymore than we would. If we had the Chinese and Russians behind us, I think wiping out Iran and Pakistan would be fairly simple, or at least, a hell of a lot more simple than if it was just mainly the US, like it always is.

    Also, although I am fully aware (or at least partially aware) of the UN's failings and problems, I still support the premise of the UN. We should have an international group like that, to deal with world wide situations, but i guess its like taking all of the corruptions and bickering of all of those nations, and putting it all into one place.

    I really would want to avoid the US gunning it alone, we can't deal with 2 more wars as it is.
    Last edited by Crossroads; 04-24-12 at 10:44 PM.

  5. #85
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,022

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    There is no need for military action in Syria. Syria, which is piece of the basket case of the Middle East, is doing for itself. This is exactly what Muslims in this region need to be doing. The only way forward with this region is for the people to assume responsibility for themselves and create their own prosperous futures away from their dictator proned societies. Success means an eventual "Peace in the Middle East" that joins the modernized world. Failure means that the West (and Israel), as their scapegoat, can no longer hold water.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  6. #86
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    There is no need for military action in Syria. Syria, which is piece of the basket case of the Middle East, is doing for itself. This is exactly what Muslims in this region need to be doing. The only way forward with this region is for the people to assume responsibility for themselves and create their own prosperous futures away from their dictator proned societies. Success means an eventual "Peace in the Middle East" that joins the modernized world. Failure means that the West (and Israel), as their scapegoat, can no longer hold water.
    Hey, welcome back friend.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  7. #87
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,022

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    We sent some planes in to Libya, and then got out. We destroyed a part of a city in Panama, and then got out. We attacked Granada and then got out. We sent Saddam packing in '91, and then got out. Is that what you're suggesting in Syria, or do you see another protracted nation building and winning hearts and minds fiasco?

    and what, exactly, did we gain in Panama and Granada?
    What exactly have you gained from any venture beyond the Revolutionary War? Fighting for American freedom (unless we count our Civil War) ended when the Brits left town. Everything from ridding the Mediterranean of Barbary Pirates, to repairing our trade deals with Europe by chasing Hitler down to a basement, to securing oil fields in the Middle East has been about maintaining a way of life. Let's face it, Pearl Harbor and 9/11 were followed up with acts of revenge. Did we really have to defend our nation either time from some mass attack? Were we really in danger of falling to an enemy? The Cold War summed up our military roles ever snice we gained independence. Our way of live depends on the health of foriegn regions and our trade deals across our oceans. Our influence across the globe is vital. If kicking somebody's ass keeps the oil flowing or a Wal-Mart shelf stocked then so be it.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  8. #88
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,547

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    What exactly have you gained from any venture beyond the Revolutionary War? Fighting for American freedom (unless we count our Civil War) ended when the Brits left town. Everything from ridding the Mediterranean of Barbary Pirates, to repairing our trade deals with Europe by chasing Hitler down to a basement, to securing oil fields in the Middle East has been about maintaining a way of life. Let's face it, Pearl Harbor and 9/11 were followed up with acts of revenge. Did we really have to defend our nation either time from some mass attack? Were we really in danger of falling to an enemy? The Cold War summed up our military roles ever snice we gained independence. Our way of live depends on the health of foriegn regions and our trade deals across our oceans. Our influence across the globe is vital. If kicking somebody's ass keeps the oil flowing or a Wal-Mart shelf stocked then so be it.
    Did we have to defend our nation from Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany? Yes. Did we have to defend our nation from Vietnam, Iraq, Afganistan, Granada, panama? No.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  9. #89
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,022

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Hey, welcome back friend.
    Thanks. It's been a long year.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  10. #90
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,022

    Re: Should America deploy troops to Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Did we have to defend our nation from Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany? Yes.
    No....we did not. The Japanese nor the Germans were ever going to invade continental North America. In fact, most Americans were dead set against going to war in Europe because it was Japan that attacked Hawaii. Roosevelt had to convince Americans that the real war was in Europe, which is one of the chief reasons while it took until 1944 to get locally involved. The truth is that the war in Europe was hurting our economic trades with greater Europe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Did we have to defend our nation from Vietnam, Iraq, Afganistan, Granada, panama? No.
    In much the same fashion, the Societ Union's mass influence all over the world is precisely why we had to secure our influences in order to protect trade deals with foriegn regions. And like it or not, the world runs on oil. Virtually every military adventure since the Revolutionary War has been about protecting our economic way of life. And we continue to do the same today. Oil flowing ot of the Middle East depends on a region that can't seem to behave without dictators oppressing them and fueling radical religious rebellion, which in the end threatens us. Therefore, how do we keep the oil flowing without the handy dandy dictator? Without an opposing superpower for the world to fear behind our shield, we have come to a point in history where we are going to actually have to stand by our high moral preach.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

Page 9 of 24 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... 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
  •