• 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!

Should we go into Syria

Should we go into Syria

  • Yes, the red line has been crossed

    Votes: 23 13.9%

  • No way Jose, not our problem

    Votes: 143 86.1%
  • Total voters
    166
Diogenes said:
That belongs over in the Conspiracy Theories forum.
Click to expand...

You asked the question. Now you don't like the historical answer.

Originally Posted by Diogenes View Post

If so, then someone in the US government needs to be tried and executed for treason. Who do you suggest we start with?
 
ChrisL said:
I agree with only your last statement. I don't care about what the rest of the world "thinks." Also, we should only ever help our TRUE allies. Let somebody else take care of it. I'm sick of being the world police. I want them to just leave us the hell alone!!! Go cry to someone else for help for once.
Click to expand...

You should. Why bother having trade treaties if we don't enforce them? Why bother having tax treaties between nations if we don't enforce them? Why bother having sanctions if we don't enforce them?

It doesn't matter what they think, it matters if they will enforce their part of their agreements. Moving towards a world that operates its treaties and agreements as little more than "ink on paper" will come to no good for anyone.
 
obvious Child said:
You should. Why bother having trade treaties if we don't enforce them? Why bother having tax treaties between nations if we don't enforce them? Why bother having sanctions if we don't enforce them?

It doesn't matter what they think, it matters if they will enforce their part of their agreements. Moving towards a world that operates its treaties and agreements as little more than "ink on paper" will come to no good for anyone.
Click to expand...

And I don't think that will change anytime soon. Hopefully what's going on now is just posturing.
 
cpwill said:
I'm not terribly worried about Hezbollah retaliating against Israel for two reasons:

1. Israel can handle herself. Look up "Iron Dome", if you like.
2. Hezbollah is rather busy, at the moment. Turns out they are embroiled (who knew) in a civil war in Syria.
Click to expand...



I agree that Israel can handle herself, but tho Hezbollah may be helping
out a bit, don't think that they have forgotten about Israel..
 
We should not go to Syria just yet.

The chemical weapons evidence found in the rebel's quarters could just as easily be a large purposeful spill of insecticide perpetrated by the rebels on their own people simply to bring the U.S. in on their side.

After all, the rebels do have a considerable al Qaeda element among them, and we know what they're capable of.

Best now is to support a U.N. watchdog on both sides, composed of people from many nations, while encouraging both sides to find a more peaceful solution.
 
Smeagol said:
From what I'm seeing in tge news, it looks like there's going to be an air raid(s) this week. I'm concerned a out what coud go wrong:

1. In the spirit of the Middle Eastern dictator human shields, what if Assad makes some lucky guesses and intentionally places a bunch of chemical stockpiles at targets that we strike? Massive secondary explosions of chemical bombs triggered by the US Military. Add some anti-American middle eastern propaganda and its the Great Satan killing tens of thousands of Arabs in its war on Islam under the hypocritical guise of bringing freedom to Syria in or ther to clear the land of people so we can take their oil without much of a native population to deal with. FYI: the generally accepted perception of the US in that part of the world is regardless of our stated goal, ultimately any and all US military action in the Middle East is motivated by oil.h

2. Inadvertently joining forces with radical extremists that could lead to an Al Qaeda controlled Syruan government. Its pitiful but in Middle Eastern geo-politics there are often no good guys.

3. Doomsday spoil sport reaction that could lead to attacks on friendly countries in the region.
Click to expand...



Of course, many things could go wrong and the longer we wait the worse it could be... Wouldn't our satellites catch such a movement of chemical weapons? Lebanon and Jordan are already in deep ****.. The Arab League doesn't seem to be resistant to the idea.. Whatever happens, it will always be ****e vs. Sunni, so we don't want to make the same mistakes we have made in Iraq and more followup than we have given to the other Arab Spring countries..but this is supposed to be just a punishment and lesson for Assad for using chemical weapons on his own people....we will have to wait and see...
 
Juanita said:
Of course, many things could go wrong and the longer we wait the worse it could be... Wouldn't our satellites catch such a movement of chemical weapons? Lebanon and Jordan are already in deep ****.. The Arab League doesn't seem to be resistant to the idea.. Whatever happens, it will always be ****e vs. Sunni, so we don't want to make the same mistakes we have made in Iraq and more followup than we have given to the other Arab Spring countries..but this is supposed to be just a punishment and lesson for Assad for using chemical weapons on his own people....we will have to wait and see...
Click to expand...

Satellites were also supposed to see the wmds in Iraq.

I don't know. It's an insane region of the world.
 
Smeagol said:
Satellites were also supposed to see the wmds in Iraq.

I don't know. It's an insane region of the world.
Click to expand...



It definitely is an insane region of the world.. If we are going to have to wait until a report has been issued to the U.N., which Britain is now saying, we lose any advantage that we may have had, and the more time they have to move things, hide things or even launch another gas attack..... Plan B--call for the immediate return of Congress and get the ok ...plan C...go for it NOW and fvck the consequences---(probably not) but I feel it is a now or never situation.
 
I just LOVE the propaganda our government is feeding us with the pictures of the children and babies. Trying to make us feel bad and guilty so we'll get behind Obama's stupid decision to perhaps start World War III. :roll:
 
ChrisL said:
The "world economy" is going to collapse. We should concentrate on our own country and forget about the Middle East.

MIT Predicts That World Economy Will Collapse By 2030 | Popular Science

Forty years after its initial publication, a study called The Limits to Growth is looking depressingly prescient. Commissioned by an international think tank called the Club of Rome, the 1972 report found that if civilization continued on its path toward increasing consumption, the global economy would collapse by 2030. Population losses would ensue, and things would generally fall apart.

The study was — and remains — nothing if not controversial, with economists doubting its predictions and decrying the notion of imposing limits on economic growth. Australian researcher Graham Turner has examined its assumptions in great detail during the past several years, and apparently his latest research falls in line with the report’s predictions, according to Smithsonian Magazine. The world is on track for disaster, the magazine says.

The study, initially completed at MIT, relied on several computer models of economic trends and estimated that if things didn’t change much, and humans continued to consume natural resources apace, the world would run out at some point. Oil will peak (some argue it has) before dropping down the other side of the bell curve, yet demand for food and services would only continue to rise. Turner says real-world data from 1970 to 2000 tracks with the study’s draconian predictions: “There is a very clear warning bell being rung here. We are not on a sustainable trajectory,” he tells Smithsonian.

Is this impossible to fix? No, according to both Turner and the original study. If governments enact stricter policies and technologies can be improved to reduce our environmental footprint, economic growth doesn’t have to become a market white dwarf, marching toward inevitable implosion. But just how to do that is another thing entirely.
Click to expand...

:shrug: I was right there on overconsumption leading to devaluation until they went into the peak-oil nonsense. Every single prediction made by that crowd in the last century plus has proven wildly off-base.

In the meantime, the notion that because debt exists we should go ahead and throw global trade to the winds is....

....well, it sort of puts you in the position of the people arguing for the Smoot-Hawley Tarrif. The one that helped kick off the Great Depression.
 
ChrisL said:
I just LOVE the propaganda our government is feeding us with the pictures of the children and babies. Trying to make us feel bad and guilty so we'll get behind Obama's stupid decision to perhaps start World War III. :roll:
Click to expand...

Do you think that they are faked? Do you think that they are falsehoods? Do you think that CNN / FOX / MSNBC / CBC et. al. are "the government"?

And how do you argue that a limited intervention in Syria starts WWIII? The Russians aren't about to come into it for Syria (though they may lend them some quiet aid - material, moral support, backing at the UN, etc), and frankly neither is Iran outside of the kinds of forces (IRGC/Qods) that they have already deployed.
 
obvious Child said:
You should. Why bother having trade treaties if we don't enforce them? Why bother having tax treaties between nations if we don't enforce them? Why bother having sanctions if we don't enforce them?

It doesn't matter what they think, it matters if they will enforce their part of their agreements. Moving towards a world that operates its treaties and agreements as little more than "ink on paper" will come to no good for anyone.
Click to expand...

Bingo. That's a degradation back to a Hobbessian world order, and we will end up in more conflict from it, not less.
 
ChrisL said:
I just LOVE the propaganda our government is feeding us with the pictures of the children and babies. Trying to make us feel bad and guilty so we'll get behind Obama's stupid decision to perhaps start World War III. :roll:
Click to expand...

Remember those stories about Iraqis dumping babies out of incubators in Kuwait? The truth is the first casualty of war. (I forget who I should attribute that to)
 
Juanita said:
I don't know, would they?
Click to expand...

Yes, they would. As historic enemies of the ruling elite in Syria, and trying to follow a subservient line to the US/NATO policy direction, Turkey has every motivation for doing so. Add to that the thrust of their Sunni convictions that the Shi'a régime in Damascus is an abomination, you have perfect storm conditions under which the truth has little chance of survival.
 
Grand Mal said:
Remember those stories about Iraqis dumping babies out of incubators in Kuwait? The truth is the first casualty of war. (I forget who I should attribute that to)
Click to expand...

I don't know how truthful it is, but they sure are using it to their advantage. :roll: As if our government REALLY cares? Our government cares about it's assets and the "global community" in terms of currency. They don't care at all about those people but will shamelessly use them as tools of propaganda. It's really quite disgusting what we do sometimes. I wish they would just be honest and tell us the REAL reason why our government is so interested in involving us in this civil war, but then the blind liberal ideologues would never go along with this. Hence the "look at the poor children" approach.
 
cpwill said:
Do you think that they are faked? Do you think that they are falsehoods? Do you think that CNN / FOX / MSNBC / CBC et. al. are "the government"?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily fake but being used as propaganda so people will support these military actions. Of course, everyone knows that nowadays the media is just a government tool.

And how do you argue that a limited intervention in Syria starts WWIII? The Russians aren't about to come into it for Syria (though they may lend them some quiet aid - material, moral support, backing at the UN, etc), and frankly neither is Iran outside of the kinds of forces (IRGC/Qods) that they have already deployed.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you are not up to date on the latest happenings, including threats made. Perhaps you are so caught up in defending this war that you have missed the world is in chaos right now.
 
cpwill said:
:shrug: I was right there on overconsumption leading to devaluation until they went into the peak-oil nonsense. Every single prediction made by that crowd in the last century plus has proven wildly off-base.
Click to expand...

Apparently you are wrong. Read the article. Experts say these predictions are on par with what is actually going on. Of course you're free to remain in denial about it if you so choose. Oil supplies are NOT infinite. They WILL run out eventually, especially at the current rate of consumption, and 3rd-world countries who have joined in the "global economy" who are now increasing their consumption of fossil fuels as well.

In the meantime, the notion that because debt exists we should go ahead and throw global trade to the winds is....
Click to expand...

Bottom line is we need to start looking out for our own interests. According to experts this is unsustainable and is going to have painful consequences.

....well, it sort of puts you in the position of the people arguing for the Smoot-Hawley Tarrif. The one that helped kick off the Great Depression.
Click to expand...

As I'm sure you well know, making comparisons to the happenings of today to those in the 1920s and 1930s is rather dim.
 
ChrisL said:
Apparently you are wrong. Read the article. Experts say these predictions are on par with what is actually going on.
Click to expand...

:lol: "experts" do? Oh, goodness, well, if experts do....


Experts are all over the map Chris. Everyone cites those they like.

Of course you're free to remain in denial about it if you so choose. Oil supplies are NOT infinite. They WILL run out eventually, especially at the current rate of consumption,
Click to expand...

Eventually absolutely. In the meantime, however, exploitable reserves have only traveled in one direction over the last hundred years - even as demand has skyrocketed, they have increased :).

and 3rd-world countries who have joined in the "global economy" who are now increasing their consumption of fossil fuels as well.
Click to expand...

Yup. China's rate of increase is about to slow, and India's.... maybe. We'll see if they can get a handle on the rupee.

Bottom line is we need to start looking out for our own interests.
Click to expand...

I agree. Many of our interests are located in Syria.

According to experts this is unsustainable and is going to have painful consequences.
Click to expand...

Everything is unsustainable at some point. The United States is unsustainable, as the Earth is going to crash into the sun. The idea that eventually the law of large numbers demands a low-probability high-impact event with the capability of destabilizing the global economy does not justify allowing one to occur or even encouraging it, any more than your own assured eventual death justifies you playing in traffic or refusing to get medical care now.

As I'm sure you well know, making comparisons to the happenings of today to those in the 1920s and 1930s is rather dim.
Click to expand...

Not really. The same isolationist streak will have the same result - massive job loss, economic destruction, and large increases in poverty, combined with slower growth hindering recovery until we are smart enough to switch back.

economic-freedom-and-income.jpg


Economic freedom creates economic growth. If you want an example of a nation that has put in place the "let's close off from the world and spend all our resources on ourselves" philosophy, it is named "North Korea".
 
Painter said:
"Evildoers"? Really?
Are we not one of the biggest evildoers of modern history?
If it is our job to punish these evil doers, how shall we deal with ourselves?
Click to expand...

No, I think everyone would agree that was the Nazis.
 
cpwill said:
:
Economic freedom creates economic growth. If you want an example of a nation that has put in place the "let's close off from the world and spend all our resources on ourselves" philosophy, it is named "North Korea".
Click to expand...

I dont know of anyone claiming we should be isolationist. Rather, people want non intervention.
 
cpwill said:
:lol: "experts" do? Oh, goodness, well, if experts do....


Experts are all over the map Chris. Everyone cites those they like.



Eventually absolutely. In the meantime, however, exploitable reserves have only traveled in one direction over the last hundred years - even as demand has skyrocketed, they have increased :).



Yup. China's rate of increase is about to slow, and India's.... maybe. We'll see if they can get a handle on the rupee.



I agree. Many of our interests are located in Syria.



Everything is unsustainable at some point. The United States is unsustainable, as the Earth is going to crash into the sun. The idea that eventually the law of large numbers demands a low-probability high-impact event with the capability of destabilizing the global economy does not justify allowing one to occur or even encouraging it, any more than your own assured eventual death justifies you playing in traffic or refusing to get medical care now.



Not really. The same isolationist streak will have the same result - massive job loss, economic destruction, and large increases in poverty, combined with slower growth hindering recovery until we are smart enough to switch back.

economic-freedom-and-income.jpg


Economic freedom creates economic growth. If you want an example of a nation that has put in place the "let's close off from the world and spend all our resources on ourselves" philosophy, it is named "North Korea".
Click to expand...

This whole posting is doing nothing but white washing the situation cpwill. :roll: We all know oil is going to run out eventually, whether that be in 20, 30, 40 years or more. It will happen, and most countries are increasing their use of fossil fuels, not decreasing.

It would be a good idea to stop dealing with ME affairs and start working on alternative energy forms and drilling here at home.
 
cpwill said:
Bingo. That's a degradation back to a Hobbessian world order, and we will end up in more conflict from it, not less.
Click to expand...

Indeed. This is partially also why we need to suck China into these agreements. Giving them more power at the same time tying their hands. Russia however, I still feel won't play by the rules. China still has much to prove and knows it can do so by being a good global partner.
 
ChrisL said:
And I don't think that will change anytime soon. Hopefully what's going on now is just posturing.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but this is a biggie. Chemical weapons on civilian populations is pretty bad. Especially since most of the world has signed up on the weapons banning treaties. It's already bad that North Korea pulled out of the test ban treaty.

Ultimately the problem isn't Syria. It's the message to everyone else that our threats have no bite. That will have serious consequences down the line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom