View Poll Results: Should the US Arm & Train the Syrian Rebels?

Voters
48. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes and why

    1 2.08%
  • No and why not

    41 85.42%
  • I don't know

    5 10.42%
  • Gooooosfrabra.

    1 2.08%
Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 129

Thread: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

  1. #41
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,400

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Those numbers are not correct.....its 30k in Iraq. 50K in Syria. The US doesn't have that much Intel in Syria to get the picture.
    The last CIA assessment put the total number at about 31k. Even if it were 30k in Iraq, my point still stands. If an active force of 271,500 trained military personnel cannot defeat a bunch of untrained thugs numbering around 30,000, then what is the point of helping them? If the Iraqi military is that weak and ineffective, then even if we killed every member of ISIS, some other bunch of Islamists would just rise up and take their place.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  2. #42
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    There are 271,500 active members of the Iraqi military and another 528,000 in reserve. The total strength of ISIS is estimated to be a little more than 30,000 and that is between Iraq and Syria. If the Iraqi military cannot handle an untrained force of thugs that they outnumber by 10 to 1, then what is the point of helping them?
    So ISIS, a group that wants to kill everyone one of us just because we're not saying "Praise Allah", doesn't take over.

  3. #43
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    There are 271,500 active members of the Iraqi military and another 528,000 in reserve. The total strength of ISIS is estimated to be a little more than 30,000 and that is between Iraq and Syria. If the Iraqi military cannot handle an untrained force of thugs that they outnumber by 10 to 1, then what is the point of helping them?
    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Those numbers are not correct.....its 30k in Iraq. 50K in Syria. The US doesn't have that much Intel in Syria to get the picture.
    Yep, and those swelling numbers in Syria are due in large part to the so-called moderate (though I've never believed they were, and have pointed it out all along) rebels joining the Islamic State ranks!
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  4. #44
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    So ISIS, a group that wants to kill everyone one of us just because we're not saying "Praise Allah", doesn't take over.
    Oh dear.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  5. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    I know you want everything to be about some grand conspiracy, but it isn't. The proposed Wolfowitz doctrine (again, never enacted) was devised after the fall of the Soviet Union and was done so to prepare the US to face off against the rise of another superpower. At the time, the Soviet Union's allies in the ME consisted of said countries, and there was seen by him as a need to ensure that the next superpower that came didn't fill the void. Problem with your theory is that there is no second superpower, thus no reason. Also, back in the Cold War days, we did a better job of maintaining close times to countries we've toppled, which isn't something that we've carried over to today. Instead installing a puppet government, we let the people take over and do as they please. Come to think of it, I almost wish we did follow that doctrine, as maybe we'd have these countries better in line.

    In any event, you keep painting a rosy picture for Syria, and seem to want to gloss over the whole reason that this civil war, (and come to think of it, Lybia as well, though there was the refugee crisis that was occurring that factored more into that response) If you recall, in the beginning, all the Syrian people wanted were democratic reforms and the protests were non-violent. But how did Assad respond to them? By murdering around 2000 of them, and arresting another 12000. Had Assad been the good guy you like to think he is, he could of worked with the protesters to an amicable solution. He's a tyrant, and I'm not going to blame them for wanting to rise up against him. Say what you will about the President's response to this crisis (And as I've said, I oppose supporting the rebels but to be clear, those are for selfish reasons), what he was doing was responding to murdering of innocent civilians when all they wanted was reforms. Bottom line, we didn't start this war, Assad and his brutal regime did.

    Then why wasn't the Christians ever part of those beginning Demonstrations? Just why was the MB allowed to set up protests calling for Democratic Reform? In which many of them were exiled from Syria by Assad's Father. Which was after Pelosi and the Demos were running around at the End of Bush' term and calling Assad a Reformer. Also Assad gave Amnesty to those with no connection to the MB.

    Also after the Sunni Rebels Suffered one of their first defeats.....they then went and attacked the Christians burning down their Churches and homes. Again they used Chems like Assad did. They don't care about the people.....and its been shown in their actions.

    All that talking they do is front of the Camera is thru Al Jazeera and thru Sunni Communications and Broadcasting.

  6. #46
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,400

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    So ISIS, a group that wants to kill everyone one of us just because we're not saying "Praise Allah", doesn't take over.
    They may want to spread radical Islam across the globe but that doesn't mean they can. Don't fall into the fear mongering trap. There have always been groups out there like ISIS and there will be for quite some time to come. The reason why we don't get hit with major terrorist attacks all the time is because those Islamists can't do it. If they could they would regardless of what we do in the Middle East. No one bats a 1000. This notion that the only thing that has kept us safe since 9/11 is being at constant war is absurd.

    The fact is there is no reason the Iraqi military should not be able to defeat ISIS being that they outnumber them 10 to 1. If the Iraqi military is so weak and ineffective that it can't defeat a bunch of thugs like ISIS, then even if we go in and defeat them for them, the country's days are numbered anyway as there are tons of other Islamists that will take their place. Hell if Iraq is that weak it would not surprise me if Boko Haram didn't start looking at it.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  7. #47
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,918
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Should the US Arm and Train the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Heya Pero. Well.....we know they want Assad gone. We also know their primary goal isn't to remove ISIS. As mentioned.....the Syrian Rebels have made an alliance with ISIS.

    Which the point is.....they know what ISIS has done. Yet they still made a pact with them. They even know they beheaded our people. Yet they make an alliance with them....and want us to arm them.
    Most of the Syrian Rebels are either AQ or ISIS or has ties to AQ and ISIS. The moderate Islamist Rebels are very small if they really existed. Secular Islamist Rebels, even the name of the moderates makes me wonder. Perhaps it is a name chosen by them because that is exactly what we want to believe.

    Isn't it ironic that the Obama administration is participating and organizing or trying to all these regime changes.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  8. #48
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Then why wasn't the Christians ever part of those beginning Demonstrations? Just why was the MB allowed to set up protests calling for Democratic Reform? In which many of them were exiled from Syria by Assad's Father. Which was after Pelosi and the Demos were running around at the End of Bush' term and calling Assad a Reformer. Also Assad gave Amnesty to those with no connection to the MB.

    Also after the Sunni Rebels Suffered one of their first defeats.....they then went and attacked the Christians burning down their Churches and homes. Again they used Chems like Assad did. They don't care about the people.....and its been shown in their actions.

    All that talking they do is front of the Camera is thru Al Jazeera and thru Sunni Communications and Broadcasting.
    You are talking about what things have evolved to. Again, I'm not arguing we should support the rebels at this point, as that well is very much tainted. All I know is that in very beginning, when this civil war could of been averted, Assad chose to drop the hammer as he has always done because he's a Dictator who loves to abuse his power. It's only because of what that Rebels have become that I say we shouldn't support them. Still, that doesn't change the lesson from history, that if you support a dictator's government (either directly, or indirectly by not providing help when needed) it will come back to bite you in the ass like it did with the Shah.

    Oh, and Bush also told us what a great friend Putin was.... how did that turn out?

  9. #49
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    They may want to spread radical Islam across the globe but that doesn't mean they can. Don't fall into the fear mongering trap. There have always been groups out there like ISIS and there will be for quite some time to come. The reason why we don't get hit with major terrorist attacks all the time is because those Islamists can't do it. If they could they would regardless of what we do in the Middle East. No one bats a 1000. This notion that the only thing that has kept us safe since 9/11 is being at constant war is absurd.

    The fact is there is no reason the Iraqi military should not be able to defeat ISIS being that they outnumber them 10 to 1. If the Iraqi military is so weak and ineffective that it can't defeat a bunch of thugs like ISIS, then even if we go in and defeat them for them, the country's days are numbered anyway as there are tons of other Islamists that will take their place. Hell if Iraq is that weak it would not surprise me if Boko Haram didn't start looking at it.
    First off, Afghanistan and 9/11. That's all I need to say in regards to why it's not good to let a Islamic State exist. We let it happen once, and look what happened.

    Back to Iraq though. Iraq's problem isn't so much a conventional one as it is a political one. The whole reason ISIS was able to move with relative ease through Iraq's territory is because they came through the Sunni-held territory in Iraq. Over the past few years, since the US left (and all influence along with it), the Shiite Regime in Baghdad have been treating the Sunni worse then ****. So when (Sunni) ISIS came in, they were seen more as liberators than conquerors. In truth, many Iraqi Army positions were abandoned in the wake of their advance, as they didn't want to fight for a country that didn't represent them.

    And yes, I know what that means, and is why I'm still open the possibility of making the ME one giant crater.

  10. #50
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,400

    Re: Should the US Arm and Trian the Syrian Rebels?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    First off, Afghanistan and 9/11. That's all I need to say in regards to why it's not good to let a Islamic State exist. We let it happen once, and look what happened.
    The 9/11 hijackers were almost all Saudis. They trained in American flight schools. They didn't need the Taliban in Afghanistan to pull it off.

    Back to Iraq though. Iraq's problem isn't so much a conventional one as it is a political one. The whole reason ISIS was able to move with relative ease through Iraq's territory is because they came through the Sunni-held territory in Iraq. Over the past few years, since the US left (and all influence along with it), the Shiite Regime in Baghdad have been treating the Sunni worse then ****. So when (Sunni) ISIS came in, they were seen more as liberators than conquerors. In truth, many Iraqi Army positions were abandoned in the wake of their advance, as they didn't want to fight for a country that didn't represent them.

    And yes, I know what that means, and is why I'm still open the possibility of making the ME one giant crater.
    Yes, its a politically corrupt and ineffective state. The world is full of Islamists looking to take advantage of such weakness. Once again, what is the point of helping them if they can't defeat ISIS? Defeating ISIS won't make Iraq a model of democracy and good governance, it will just move one bunch of Islamic thugs out so another can take its place.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •