View Poll Results: Should we go into Syria

Voters
228. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, the red line has been crossed

    27 11.84%
  • No way Jose, not our problem

    201 88.16%
Page 26 of 102 FirstFirst ... 1624252627283676 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 1019

Thread: Should we go into Syria

  1. #251
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    ....If that argument is the best one that can be mustered in its case.... then implicitly it makes a fairly strong argument that the cases are not that terribly different.



    We do, actually. The Syrian government employed a portion of it's CW stockpile. Confirmed by the Intelligence Community here at home, and its' incidence confirmed independently by Doctors without Borders abroad.
    Oh bull cpwill! Doctors without Borders confirmed that there were deaths and casualties. They don't know who is responsible. From what I've read there are a lot who seem to think Al Qaeda insurgents are behind this attack. I do believe the Syrian government is the most likely culprit.

    HOWEVER, as others have said, why would the Syrian government use chemical weapons after we warned them not to, and when they are winning the conflict? It just doesn't make sense. Some think that Al Qaeda is behind this in order to draw the United States into this cluster ****. They bring up some good points.

  2. #252
    Educator Coin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Albania
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    907

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Oh bull cpwill! Doctors without Borders confirmed that there were deaths and casualties. They don't know who is responsible. From what I've read there are a lot who seem to think Al Qaeda insurgents are behind this attack. I do believe the Syrian government is the most likely culprit.

    HOWEVER, as others have said, why would the Syrian government use chemical weapons after we warned them not to, and when they are winning the conflict? It just doesn't make sense. Some think that Al Qaeda is behind this in order to draw the United States into this cluster ****. They bring up some good points.
    Yeah that's what i always believed these days.
    All this, was made up just to push Obama to give the go.
    Envidia te mata !!!

    The blind leading the blind !!!


  3. #253
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Coin View Post
    Yeah that's what i always believed these days.
    All this, was made up just to push Obama to give the go.
    Well, I think the bigger point to make is that we really have no clue what is going on over there, who is good and who is bad. It would be stupid to go over there all arrogant as if we know what's best. I say we leave it alone. I'm pretty sure a lot of these insurgents are not the "good guys" that some would like us to think they are. I'm willing to bet a lot of them are just as bad if not even worse than the current regime. Many are probably Islamic extremists who would like Sharia to be the ruling law of the land.

  4. #254
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Partly. I maintain my original position - that Syria is a place where we have huge national interests, and that we should utilize a targeted campaign to dismantle their integrated air defense system capability, secure or destroy their WMD stocks, and provide cover to fleeing civilians. We don't need to invade, or even seek to ensure one sides' victory over the other, but we do need to ensure that WMD's do not get loose, doing so will require serving some of our national interests (the dismantlement of some of Syria's C2 functions), and we should also utilize what force we have to mitigate or minimize the mass human suffering taking place on the ground.
    I fail to see what national interests we have in Syria.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  5. #255
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Diogenes View Post
    It is strange how much the liberals of today sound like the isolationist conservatives of 80-90 years ago.
    I don't deny I am an isolationist.

    When we are broke and playing world police in nearly every local conflict..... yes..... Im for isolationism before that.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  6. #256
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by shrubnose View Post
    Wrong.

    Check out Kosovo. It worked there, with little loss of U.S or other NATO lives.

    Bombs are expensive.

    Taking care of a disabled veteran for his/her entire live is also expensive.
    And having to do neither to assist either side in Syria........ what is the cost of that compared to the other options?
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  7. #257
    Sage
    shrubnose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Europe
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 03:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,851
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    And having to do neither to assist either side in Syria........ what is the cost of that compared to the other options?



    This is not about assisting either side.

    This is about punishing the Syrian government for its use of chemical weapons on it's own people.

  8. #258
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by shrubnose View Post
    This is not about assisting either side.

    This is about punishing the Syrian government for its use of chemical weapons on it's own people.
    Heya SN.....Then shouldn't we punish the Rebels for using Chems on the people too? Then for going out and Massacring Christians all due to not getting their way?

    Let not forget they are responsible for over 40k in deaths. Plus Just drove 30k Kurds up out of Syria.

  9. #259
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    I fail to see what national interests we have in Syria.
    On the contrary, we have a huge national interest in Syria. Not only is it Iran's chief ally in the region, but it is responsible for enabling the deaths of thousands of American servicemembers. It's provides aid to Hezbollah and (until recently) al-Qaeda, has WMD production and stockpiles, and has the ability to destabilize a high-impact portion of the globe. Geography and politics both require that we maintain our interests in the middle east, and Syria is a big piece of that.

    I don't deny I am an isolationist.
    Interesting. Are you also a farmer?

  10. #260
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: Should we go into Syria

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Oh bull cpwill! Doctors without Borders confirmed that there were deaths and casualties.
    Did you miss the words "its' incidence"? As stated - the use of chemical weapons was confirmed by DWB, and the fact that those weapons had come from the regime was confirmed by the U.S. and British Intelligence Communities.

    They don't know who is responsible.
    Hmm, now that's an argument that requires an interesting implication. Given that the U.S. and British governments say that they do know who was responsible, what is your background expertise in U.S. / FIVE EYES collections capabilities that you are able to state with certainty that this is a false claim?

    HOWEVER, as others have said, why would the Syrian government use chemical weapons after we warned them not to, and when they are winning the conflict?
    because we are toothless saps, Chris. Our "warnings" and "let me be clears" and "we will take this very seriously's" are worth approximately a bucket of warm spit in the Middle East right now. Hopefully we will actually (finally) start to back up our words with action, and this will change in the future. But as of a month ago, if I were advising Assad, I would have told him he could pretty much ignore U.S. blustering as a vast majority of their populace didn't want to get involved, and their president was unlikely to break his pattern of behavior in order to cross them.

    In the meantime, limited use achieves two objectives: 1. it lends credibility to his detterence. North Korea has nukes for this (and Iran wants nukes for this), but Assad has chemical shells, so that's what he uses to ensure regime survival - but you have to demonstrate willingness and capability. and 2. it establishes a baseline for future use. You don't go all-out immediately after the President of the U.S. issues a redline statement, that puts him in a situation where his hand is forced. You boil the frog slowly, and after you have imported enough SA-20's from Russia that you feel that you have a strong enough deterrent from an air campaign - the trick is to introduce the system in such a way that U.S. reaction is limited and mitigated.

    It just doesn't make sense. Some think that Al Qaeda is behind this in order to draw the United States into this cluster ****. They bring up some good points.
    Yup. And while it's not impossible, so do the people who claim that 9/11 was an inside job to legitimize an American invasion of Iraq. But claims of conspiracy which lack evidence have a forum.



    Regardless, the argument for a series of strikes and a limited campagin in Syria does not depend on Chemical Weapons usage by any player - though that does increase rather the urgency for it.

Page 26 of 102 FirstFirst ... 1624252627283676 ... 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
  •