• 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!

U.S. Weighs Direct Military Action Against ISIS in Syria

Heya HD. :2wave: Check out the War on Terror Forum, where we have information up on these guys. Do you think possession of Scud Missiles make them more of a threat? They have now taken Assads last military base in Northern Syria. An Air base. They also now have an Airport.


http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-t...ighting-force-us-special-ops-sources-say.html

http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-terror/203036-isis-captures-major-air-base-syria.html

That wouldn't have happened had Obama not been supporting these terrorists fighting Assad along with SA and a couple European partners.
 
That wouldn't have happened had Obama not been supporting these terrorists fighting Assad along with SA and a couple European partners.

Heya Monte. :2wave: It wouldn't have happened if Qatar and the Saud hadn't thrown out weapons to those Rebels either.....you don't think they played an even bigger role?
 
Heya Monte. :2wave: It wouldn't have happened if Qatar and the Saud hadn't thrown out weapons to those Rebels either.....you don't think they played an even bigger role?

Don't know that you and I can measure that. But CIA training camps in Jordan and Turkey along with pilfered arms from Gaddafi's army have gone a long way. And I included Saudi in my post that you quoted.
 
There was no "power vacuum created in Iraq" until Barrack pulled the troops. It was thought in some circles that up to 70,000 troops would remain in Iraq - policing, training and keeping the country stable.

We're any of those seventy thousand going to be Canadian? Love how you're obsessed with committing American blood and treasure. I've got a better idea for you.
 
You're right...we left. Now we're going back.



The key thing you've missed....we left.

As most Americans now realise, both Afghanistan, and Iraq wars were a mistake. Get in front of the parade.
 
He gets his facts from Moscow, I guess. Look, this poster is an inveterate America hater who, in any dispute between the US and another country will always believe the other guy.

A, you hide from debate, under your ignore button and take punches from the sideline and 2, you play the naive game that in any dispute between the White House and another country, the White House is always telling the truth, a bit patronising.
 
We're any of those seventy thousand going to be Canadian? Love how you're obsessed with committing American blood and treasure. I've got a better idea for you.
In fact there was a huge American investment there of lives, injuries and capital. To not protect that investment, and all the sacrifices made, is the greatest blunder, a deliberate ballsup, ever made by any US President. And he did it all for politics.

But he took it a step further. Not only did he lose all that was previously gained, but many more thousands will now die as a result of his naivety, foolishness, lies and incomparable incompetence.
 
A, you hide from debate, under your ignore button and take punches from the sideline and 2, you play the naive game that in any dispute between the White House and another country, the White House is always telling the truth, a bit patronising.
In fact the White House under this Administration have made lies a part of their policy, with the clear understanding that they can fool 40% of the people 100% of the time.
 
As most Americans now realise, both Afghanistan, and Iraq wars were a mistake. Get in front of the parade.

Afghanistan was certainly no mistake. Iraq was a series of mistakes, the most serious was pulling out without a plan.
 
In fact there was a huge American investment there of lives, injuries and capital. To not protect that investment, and all the sacrifices made, is the greatest blunder, a deliberate ballsup, ever made by any US President. And he did it all for politics.

But he took it a step further. Not only did he lose all that was previously gained, but many more thousands will now die as a result of his naivety, foolishness, lies and incomparable incompetence.
At what point do we say it is time to cut our losses?
If we have learned anything from the last decade plus, it is that the middle east region is not worth our investment.

I can't help but seeing another decade of time wasted there, a trillion or more wasted, 6000+ more lives wasted and ruined, and all for the same result.
 
Afghanistan was certainly no mistake. Iraq was a series of mistakes, the most serious was pulling out without a plan.

The most serious was going in the first place.
Most people hate to admit it, but Iraq was more stable BEFORE we intervened.
 
Or Jayvees, as Obama called them.

You seem to be one of those who believe that terrorists would act like the Allies forces did during WWII.

Terrorists can now enter the US easily, and arm themselves as well. They will simply get a weapons of some sort and murder as many civilians as they can, in shopping centers, movie theaters, and elsewhere, and then go to trial. Keep in mind that terrorists are certainly not fearful of dying, or of going to prison.

What happened in Washington DC, Fort Hood and Boston will become the norm, just as it is in Israel, Iraq, Syria, or any other war zone where terrorists are involved. Democracies believing they have a handle on terrorists and their tactics, or can rely on their military, are only fooling themselves. Think of the DC snipers times a hundred, or thousand, and then you'll get the idea.

No, I understand that by strict definition of the word, many terrorists wear business suits, some with American Flag lapel pins.

And no, I do not believe that today's "terrorists" would act like Allied Forces in WWII.

But I did learn enough while in the Army to understand that a bunch of well armed ragtag muslim zealots in the Mideast desert, WITHOUT either a navy or an air force are no threat to my homeland.
 
Heya HD. :2wave: Check out the War on Terror Forum, where we have information up on these guys. Do you think possession of Scud Missiles make them more of a threat? They have now taken Assads last military base in Northern Syria. An Air base. They also now have an Airport.


http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-t...ighting-force-us-special-ops-sources-say.html

http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-terror/203036-isis-captures-major-air-base-syria.html

Hi MMC :2wave:

No sir, their possession of Scud missles do not make them a threat to us. Unless are guys are over there, caught in a barracks like happened with PA (?) National Guard troops in the first Gulf War.

My thoughts are that if we were not in their neighborhood blowing it up, they would not be motivated to kill us. :peace
 
No, I understand that by strict definition of the word, many terrorists wear business suits, some with American Flag lapel pins.

And no, I do not believe that today's "terrorists" would act like Allied Forces in WWII.

But I did learn enough while in the Army to understand that a bunch of well armed ragtag muslim zealots in the Mideast desert, WITHOUT either a navy or an air force are no threat to my homeland.
Yes, I agree. If they were to stay in the Mideast desert they would not be a problem to anyone. The difficulty is that these ragtag muslim zealots often go noticed in society until they do harm.

Not sure why you feel they would need an air force or navy though when public transportation is available.
 
Heya HD. :2wave: Check out the War on Terror Forum, where we have information up on these guys. Do you think possession of Scud Missiles make them more of a threat? They have now taken Assads last military base in Northern Syria. An Air base. They also now have an Airport.


http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-t...ighting-force-us-special-ops-sources-say.html

http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-terror/203036-isis-captures-major-air-base-syria.html

LOL Now all they need is planes....and pilots. You do know we will shoot them down in a heartbeat, right?
 
At what point do we say it is time to cut our losses?
In Iraq? As the US President said, Iraq was 'stable'. And it was. But the idea, as has been done elsewhere in the world, was to keep it stable. By walking away after all that treasure and suffering was lunacy.
If we have learned anything from the last decade plus, it is that the middle east region is not worth our investment.
But you had already invested! All you would be doing is protecting that investment. The one honest thng Obama said was that Iraq was 'stable'. Then he withdrew the troops, the stability was ended, and everything was lost.

I can't help but seeing another decade of time wasted there, a trillion or more wasted, 6000+ more lives wasted and ruined, and all for the same result.
I can certainly understand your frustration but without a foreign policy, a long term strategy, these things are going to happen. There is still no strategy in place and Obama refers to terrorists as Jayvees. Only he was amused at hiis remark, certainly not Foley or his family and colleagues.

And the idea that the America military, the best in the world, can retreat even further is not a wise strategy either.
 
In Iraq? As the US President said, Iraq was 'stable'. And it was. But the idea, as has been done elsewhere in the world, was to keep it stable. By walking away after all that treasure and suffering was lunacy.
So we stay there forever? No. I think not.

But you had already invested! All you would be doing is protecting that investment. The one honest thng Obama said was that Iraq was 'stable'. Then he withdrew the troops, the stability was ended, and everything was lost.
So you DO want us to stay there forever.

I can certainly understand your frustration but without a foreign policy, a long term strategy, these things are going to happen. There is still no strategy in place and Obama refers to terrorists as Jayvees. Only he was amused at hiis remark, certainly not Foley or his family and colleagues.
Policies and Strategies don't fix crazy. The Middle East isn't ready to live without strife. We can't fix that with policies and strategies and keeping a military presence there for 30+ years isn't "fixing" anything.

And the idea that the America military, the best in the world, can retreat even further is not a wise strategy either.
Nah. Its better to waste all of our resources, lives, and money to the point where the government goes bankrupt. All for...... "stability".

I don't care, stay there a decade or a century. The moment we walk out those crazy ****ers are going to tear each other apart. And with the way the ROE is these days, they are going to tear each other apart while we watch.
 
So we stay there forever? No. I think not.

So you DO want us to stay there forever.

Policies and Strategies don't fix crazy. The Middle East isn't ready to live without strife. We can't fix that with policies and strategies and keeping a military presence there for 30+ years isn't "fixing" anything.

Nah. Its better to waste all of our resources, lives, and money to the point where the government goes bankrupt. All for...... "stability".

I don't care, stay there a decade or a century. The moment we walk out those crazy ****ers are going to tear each other apart. And with the way the ROE is these days, they are going to tear each other apart while we watch.

Yes of course there are those, even non Americans mind you, that think the US should keep a German/South Korean style presence there. Wonder how much they're be willing to pony up to make that happen?? Also, it wouldn't be just money as is the case with Germany/SK, any Western military presence is going to suffer regular attacks and a steady stream of body bags back home no matter how many or few.
 
Yes, I agree. If they were to stay in the Mideast desert they would not be a problem to anyone. The difficulty is that these ragtag muslim zealots often go noticed in society until they do harm.

Not sure why you feel they would need an air force or navy though when public transportation is available.

One guy with some plastic explosives in his underwear is hardly a threat to my country. 10 men with plastic explosives in their underwear are hardly a threat to my country.
 
The most serious was going in the first place.
Most people hate to admit it, but Iraq was more stable BEFORE we intervened.

It was a mistake for sure, but not the most serious. To say that it was at all stable shows a complete lack of understanding of at least the last 50 years of history regarding Iraq.
 
One guy with some plastic explosives in his underwear is hardly a threat to my country. 10 men with plastic explosives in their underwear are hardly a threat to my country.

A series of successful terrorist attacks in this country would do irreparable harm.
 
Back
Top Bottom