• 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
NoC_T said:
No mention of that on Wiki. I just checked. Whatever. Your point is?
Click to expand...

I was talking to the Matrix's city of Zion. Never mind.
My point is, war in Syria is very, very dangerous.
 
Canell said:
I was talking to the Matrix's city of Zion. Never mind.
Click to expand...
The movie? Are you serious? How do you suppose the Death Star factors into current events? Lex Luthor could be a problem.

My point is, war in Syria is very, very dangerous.
Click to expand...
If it happens. And only as another sorry little proxy skirmish. Not as a flashpoint for extinction.
 
Diogenes said:
If so, then someone in the US government needs to be tried and executed for treason. Who do you suggest we start with?
Click to expand...


The CIA in its' entirety.
 
I think if we want the UN and NATO to remain credible organisations then we have to go in and put a stop to this genocide or we can march to China/Russia's drum and sit back and do nothing.
 
Diogenes said:
But not it's political masters?? :doh :lamo :lamo:lamo
Click to expand...


The politicians change and the CIA support staff remains intact with continuity. The power behind the throne. Hang 'em high.
 
cpwill said:
I was very minorly involved, but in a military intelligence role that allowed me quite an interesting viewpoint.
Click to expand...


So, in short, instead of believing the governmental news reports, I should believe your anecdotal evidence that directly contradicts what all expert opinion says?
 
Wiggen said:
No, we refused to get involved directly in Libya because every time we get involved anywhere, left wing bastards and far right bastards spend their time criticizing us. Why don't you socialists give it a shot?
Click to expand...

We did. What do you think Libya, spearheaded by France and Britain, or Mali, spearheaded by France (especially under Socialist President Francois Hollande) represent?

I'm not of the sort of socialist that organises into petty marches and calls for world union. I think sometimes that Americans get a very skewed view of socialism. Everyone in Europe is socialist to a degree -- I vote for the Labour Party here in Britain, which is part of the Socialist International, and is the second-largest party, not to mention the most likely candidate for the next election.

When I say socialist, I merely mean that I'm a supporter of the Labour Party in Britain (as well as the Socialist Party in France, and other European Parliament allies). The Debate Politics political-lean choices aren't well suited to the European political spectrum.

Anyway, I would probably classify the Democratic Party in the United States as very weakly socialist, though they would never say so themselves.
 
Higgins86 said:
I think if we want the UN and NATO to remain credible organisations then we have to go in and put a stop to this genocide or we can march to China/Russia's drum and sit back and do nothing.
Click to expand...

Heya Higgins. :2wave: But then if we do that and use that argument. Shouldn't we go in and take out any that are committing genocide. Like the Rebels. The MB. The Salafists.

They will then set up whatever government feigning democracy and still have been responsible for genocide and their coming into power.

Otherwise why even play the part of hypocrites.
 
MMC said:
Heya Higgins. :2wave: But then if we do that and use that argument. Shouldn't we go in and take out any that are committing genocide. Like the Rebels. The MB. The Salafists.

They will then set up whatever government feigning democracy and still have been responsible for genocide and their coming into power.

Otherwise why even play the part of hypocrites.
Click to expand...


I think we have to use caution with every incident and be realistic about how much we can prevent. But in this case with potentially hundreds of thousands dead, thousands of refugees flooding into nearby countries threatening to destabilise the entire region and of course the potential use of chemical weapons I think we have to act. I mean its not like the West is rushing into this one considering how long the "civil war' as been going on.
 
Higgins86 said:
I think we have to use caution with every incident and be realistic about how much we can prevent. But in this case with potentially hundreds of thousands dead, thousands of refugees flooding into nearby countries threatening to destabilise the entire region and of course the potential use of chemical weapons I think we have to act. I mean its not like the West is rushing into this one considering how long the "civil war' as been going on.
Click to expand...

Well.....here we wont be able to prevent the country from dividing into 3 regions. This our people should already know. So just making moves to get rid of Assad and Thinking we can give the Country to the MB and the Sunni Muslims. Is a major mistake and truthfully any of our politicians saying otherwise are fools and need to be driven out of office and out to pasture.

Moreover we already have the words of the Rebels saying no Alawites can be part of anything. That's both the FSA and Al Nusra. So we know they will continue on with the Sectarian killing after Assad is removed.

Which still leaves all those Christians stuck with being hit by both Sunni and Shia.
 
MMC said:
Well.....here we wont be able to prevent the country from dividing into 3 regions. This our people should already know. So just making moves to get rid of Assad and Thinking we can give the Country to the MB and the Sunni Muslims. Is a major mistake and truthfully any of our politicians saying otherwise are fools and need to be driven out of office and out to pasture.

Moreover we already have the words of the Rebels saying no Alawites can be part of anything. That's both the FSA and Al Nusra. So we know they will continue on with the Sectarian killing after Assad is removed.

Which still leaves all those Christians stuck with being hit by both Sunni and Shia.
Click to expand...


I agree that if we do intervene we need to have a plan in motion for after Assad falls but I honestly don't think we can wait any longer. Its now or never especially given the stance of Obama and Cameron this week, if we back off now we look weak.
 
Higgins86 said:
I agree that if we do intervene we need to have a plan in motion for after Assad falls but I honestly don't think we can wait any longer. Its now or never especially given the stance of Obama and Cameron this week, if we back off now we look weak.
Click to expand...

I don't think any in the West are in a position to build up 3 countries so they can have Autonomy.

That's the thing about perception......here one day gone the next. Especially with the way we control the Media. Give it another 6 months. The FSA and the National Council will be out of the Picture. Then we will have a look at who the real players are behind the scenes.

People here in the US don't even want to do the drive by. So why waste 820k per tomahawk for no real clear gains.
 
MMC said:
I don't think any in the West are in a position to build up 3 countries so they can have Autonomy.

That's the thing about perception......here one day gone the next. Especially with the way we control the Media. Give it another 6 months. The FSA and the National Council will be out of the Picture. Then we will have a look at who the real players are behind the scenes.

People here in the US don't even want to do the drive by. So why waste 820k per tomahawk for no real clear gains.
Click to expand...

were we in a position to intervene in the Balkans given the huge amount of sovereignty and border issues that ensued and still continue to this day?
 
Higgins86 said:
I agree that if we do intervene we need to have a plan in motion for after Assad falls but I honestly don't think we can wait any longer. Its now or never especially given the stance of Obama and Cameron this week, if we back off now we look weak.
Click to expand...

Dumbest reason to attack someone................................. ever.
 
Higgins86 said:
were we in a position to intervene in the Balkans given the huge amount of sovereignty and border issues that ensued and still continue to this day?
Click to expand...

Balkan never had accurate borders through all its history.
Because the wars there changed the borders so many times and no one knows today which land belong to this country or to that country.

And 1912 was the bad move of the reason the Balkan issue still continues today.
 
Caine said:
Dumbest reason to attack someone................................. ever.
Click to expand...

Really? Do you know how foreign policy works?

The minute you start backing down and going back on your word your enemies pounce on it.
 
Higgins86 said:
Really? Do you know how foreign policy works?

The minute you start backing down and going back on your word your enemies pounce on it.
Click to expand...

How about increasing the credibility around the world of "Rules principles" like: "without clear evidence we do not act"
Your country (more than USA) is willing to act without an international mandate.
 
Coin said:
How about increasing the credibility around the world of "Rules principles" like: "without clear evidence we do not act"
Your country (more than USA) is willing to act without an international mandate.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with a bit of gun boat diplomacy.
 
Higgins86 said:
Nothing wrong with a bit of gun boat diplomacy.
Click to expand...

The reason we haven't face yet WW3 is that every country is following international rules.

If USA/Britain break one of them, it will give free will of shooting to everyone.
This happen even in real life.

You need one starter and a victim and everyone get involved:
 
Well here we go. It begins. :(

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say - World News

The U.S. could hit Syria with three days of missile strikes, perhaps beginning Thursday, in an attack meant more to send a message to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad than to topple him or cripple his military, senior U.S. officials told NBC News on Tuesday.
The State Department fed the growing drumbeat around the world for a military response to Syria's suspected use of chemical weapons against rebels Aug. 21 near Damascus, saying that while the U.S. intelligence community would release a formal assessment within the week, it was already "crystal clear" that Assad's government was responsible. Vice President Joe Biden went even further, bluntly telling an American Legion audience in Houston: "Chemical weapons have been used."
Click to expand...
 
Higgins86 said:
were we in a position to intervene in the Balkans given the huge amount of sovereignty and border issues that ensued and still continue to this day?
Click to expand...

If Assad has just one P 800 long Range Missile. We have serious problems. It is a ship killer. One strike.

Assad didn't even break out his Anti air stuff when Israel flew in to take out the Missile Shipment. Now who do you think helped him not to tip his hand?

Anyone thinking this is going to be a cakewalk is seriously deluding themselves. This isn't Libya. Assad's anti air is full circle with the S300. That's over lapping protected anti air zones and able to keep moving the whole time around whatever installation. These wont be fixed positions.

Plus now we have the Russians who are into talking War, in Moscow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom