• 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!

Exclusive: John McCain Slips Across Border Into Syria, Meets With Rebels

Jack Hays said:
My honest thoughts are these. The destruction of the Asad regime would be a strategic defeat for Iran and Hezbollah, and therefore hugely in our interest. The optimum moment for safe, effective support to forces we favor passed long ago. Nonetheless, there may still be an opportunity to do something worthwhile.

John McCain is a grown man
Click to expand...

Physically, not mentally.
 
Dezaad said:
Ok, those are the upsides, and I already agree with you in every respect on those. Have you considered any downsides, and if so, which ones, and what swayed you to dismiss or discount them?

On the matter of US senators... They should act responsibly, and I am not sure that he was. This applies to grown men and POWs as well, but I only care about U.S. senators in this case.
Click to expand...


I think McCain has acted more responsibly than anyone else. I don't think downsides come into play so long as we're only helping selected parties.
:cool:
 
ecofarm said:
There are Americans that ally themselves with extreme Islamists. He should not meet with America! There are Europeans that ally themselves with extreme Islamists. He better not be going there next! Oh, yeah, and obviously we better stop talking to pretty much the entire Mideast. There's not a state to be found without those who ally themselves with extreme Islamists. If he wants to deal with a group wherein no one allies themselves with extreme Islamists, we better make him ambassador to the moon.

Are we really gonna refuse to meet with any group that have some members who ally themselves with extreme Islamists? What kind of idiotic foreign policy is that?



You know the best part? The OP poster thinks we should engage in talks with Iran and that we should talk with Assad. Laughable hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

What difference does it make whether anyone talks to either of them? They'll do what they want to do no matter what :rolleyes:

Plus, I support Assad 100% in his fight w/the Islamofascist rebels (which apparently includes independent Sunni extremist factions--what the West calls "al Qaeda").

And fortunately, Obama isn't stupid enough to arm the anti-Assad terrorists.
 
Let's just admit it, guys. Solletica is right. McCain is in it for himself; he's a childish moron who doesn't care about anything or anyone else. And, after all, it's not like Assad really did anything wrong.
 
solletica said:
What difference does it make whether anyone talks to either of them? They'll do what they want to do no matter what :rolleyes:

Plus, I support Assad 100% in his fight w/the Islamofascist rebels (which apparently includes independent Sunni extremist factions--what the West calls "al Qaeda").

And fortunately, Obama isn't stupid enough to arm the anti-Assad terrorists.
Click to expand...

It is unlikely Al Qaida would control a new government.

Do you think the Assad regime has been better for the Syrian people than Islamists would be?
 
Dezaad said:
Do you think the Assad regime has been better for the Syrian people than Islamists would be?
Click to expand...

I don't care who the Syrians put in charge, as long as they can vote him out and not get bombed by their own military. Until the new government begins slaughtering civilians by the 10k, there's only success in the future.
 
solletica said:
Plus, I support Assad 100% in his fight w/the Islamofascist rebels (which apparently includes independent Sunni extremist factions--what the West calls "al Qaeda").
Click to expand...

Let me guess, you have a problem with drones and Gitmo but have no problem with the government killing (targeting) ~60k (of their own) civilians. How does that work? Do you believe that 60k people were terrorists operating against the Assad dictatorship.
 
Last edited:
solletica said:
What difference does it make whether anyone talks to either of them? They'll do what they want to do no matter what :rolleyes:

Plus, I support Assad 100% in his fight w/the Islamofascist rebels (which apparently includes independent Sunni extremist factions--what the West calls "al Qaeda").

And fortunately, Obama isn't stupid enough to arm the anti-Assad terrorists.
Click to expand...


Not merely nonsense, but ignorant nonsense.:mrgreen:
 
Dezaad said:
It is unlikely Al Qaida would control a new government.

Do you think the Assad regime has been better for the Syrian people than Islamists would be?
Click to expand...

Either we support al Qaeda connected rebels, or the Hezbollah-connected Assad regime.

Yeah, we couldn't possibly lose....:roll:
 
TheDemSocialist said:
By stating that i want peace in the region through diplomacy makes me a hypocrite..... Oh yea i forgot you think anyone but Assad is amazing :roll:
Click to expand...

"peace through diplomacy" is a fancy way to say, "appeasement". We tried peace through diplomacy before and 400,000 dead Americans was what we got for our troubles.

Peace through diplomacy is nothing more than a quick fix. Histoy has proven that.
 
rocket88 said:
Either we support al Qaeda connected rebels, or the Hezbollah-connected Assad regime.

Yeah, we couldn't possibly lose....:roll:
Click to expand...

I would like to see us stay out of it, but if we do get involved, I say we kill bo sides.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Whose the lesser of two evils in the situation? Both sides suck.
Click to expand...

I say the moderate rebels, but it doesn't matter because it's not that simple. "Assad wins" and "Rebels win" are not the only outcomes. There are other outcomes at stake that are far worse. The longer the fighting is allowed to drag on, the more it will threaten to destabilize neighboring countries. Hezbollah is now officially involved in the war and Lebanese Sunnis have already retaliated by firing rockets on their headquarters in Lebanon, while in the mean time Lebanon is currently government-less since the Prime Minister resigned in March (over matters related to the Syrian conflict). Jordan's population is now 10% Syrian refugees. That number is projected to be 40% by this time next year, which would almost certainly plunge Jordan in chaos. Sectarian violence is already flaring back up across Iraq with suicide bombs killing scores of civilians.

Potentially, neither side wins and Syria could split into two nations along sectarian lines, which would likely push Lebanon and Iraq into sectarian civil wars of their own. The war could languish on indefinitely with no defacto government able to solidfy control slowly transforming Syria into a failed state a la Somalia where Al Qaeda-ism, violence, and extreme poverty reign.

The very real threat of these kind of outcomes if the situation is left to fester on its own are the reason the international community needs to get involved.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Sure about that?

Al Nusrah Front conducts joint operation with Free Syrian Army - Threat Matrix
AFP: Syria revolt attracts motley foreign jihadi corps
Click to expand...

Yes I'm sure about that. The commander of the FSA has explicitly declared that they do not coordinate with one another and that Al Nusra is not under his command. Your first article is almost a year old - a lot of important things have happened since then including Al Nusra's shift toward extremism and pledge to Al Qaeda. They're both fighting to overthrow Assad, occasionally their strategic goals overlap. So? They are not the same group and you cannot claim that FSA is an extremist Islamist group just because Al Nusra is.

TheDemSocialist said:
They have however fought side by side, and many FSA leaders claim they are "the special forces of the revolution"
Click to expand...

THE leader of the FSA says otherwise. The don't fight side by side anymore - that is, since Al Nusra has moved towards extremism and Al Qaeda.
MIDEAST - Free Syrian Army nixes connection with al-Nusra Front

TheDemSocialist said:
I never claimed they were "one and the same"
Click to expand...

Good. Then perhaps you'll stop implying that helping the FSA is the same thing as helping Al-Nusra. That's a false dichotomy. If the event we give weapons to the FSA, Salam Idris has vowed to see to it they are not given to Al-Nusra or other extremist elements.


TheDemSocialist said:
But hell looks like the FSA might be having a defection problem with more people goin go the Al-Nursa front
Report: Entire Free Syrian Army Units Defecting To Al Nusra Front Because Of Its “Islamic Doctrine” And Advanced Weapons… | Weasel Zippers
Click to expand...

All the more reason to give greater support to the more moderate elements of the Opposition. Part of the reason extremist groups are gaining ground is because they're having success because they're being funded by foreign entities like Qatar. If the West were to put their weight behind the more secular groups, they would lose that advantage. Right now, your preferred policy of "do nothing" is resulting in a growing influence and power of the extremist groups like Al Nusra while undermining the power of the moderate groups. If you don't want Al Nusra and other groups like it to continue gaining power than why do you suggest continuing the policies that are already resulting in this effect? If you don't like how things are going in Syria, why do you advocate more of the same?
 
ChuckBerry said:
Helping the rebels doesn't necessarily mean we want them to win. Harassing al-Assad for a few more months/years than they might have been able to would be to our advantage, no? al-Assad continues to be worn down...Islamist money and personnel stay in the Middle East...what's not to like?
Click to expand...

Did you think.....giving those that stand against the US and the West. Battle Experience and the ability to react in response to our technology.....was a good thing? You didn't think it was actually keeping the money in just the ME now, did ya? What about those MB peeps that run keep running around Country to country talking their smack like they always do?
 
the_recruit said:
Yes I'm sure about that. The commander of the FSA has explicitly declared that they do not coordinate with one another and that Al Nusra is not under his command. Your first article is almost a year old - a lot of important things have happened since then including Al Nusra's shift toward extremism and pledge to Al Qaeda. They're both fighting to overthrow Assad, occasionally their strategic goals overlap. So? They are not the same group and you cannot claim that FSA is an extremist Islamist group just because Al Nusra is.



THE leader of the FSA says otherwise. The don't fight side by side anymore - that is, since Al Nusra has moved towards extremism and Al Qaeda.
MIDEAST - Free Syrian Army nixes connection with al-Nusra Front



Good. Then perhaps you'll stop implying that helping the FSA is the same thing as helping Al-Nusra. That's a false dichotomy. If the event we give weapons to the FSA, Salam Idris has vowed to see to it they are not given to Al-Nusra or other extremist elements.




All the more reason to give greater support to the more moderate elements of the Opposition. Part of the reason extremist groups are gaining ground is because they're having success because they're being funded by foreign entities like Qatar. If the West were to put their weight behind the more secular groups, they would lose that advantage. Right now, your preferred policy of "do nothing" is resulting in a growing influence and power of the extremist groups like Al Nusra while undermining the power of the moderate groups. If you don't want Al Nusra and other groups like it to continue gaining power than why do you suggest continuing the policies that are already resulting in this effect? If you don't like how things are going in Syria, why do you advocate more of the same?
Click to expand...


Now what was that about these rebels? What is the reason we should continue to listen to the Syrian Rebels who have been busted out lying and deceiving those in the West. You didn't think that Idris actually has any control over Al Nusra now.....did you? You do understand that when Al Nusra tells Idris to Jump. The Putz will do so as high he can.....and without any hesitation whatsoever.

Did you think the Syrian rebels were any better themselves?
 
Dezaad said:
It is unlikely Al Qaida would control a new government.

Do you think the Assad regime has been better for the Syrian people than Islamists would be?
Click to expand...

Did you consider the MB? You are aware that they are involved into this mix.....Correct?
 
Jack Hays said:
My honest thoughts are these. The destruction of the Asad regime would be a strategic defeat for Iran and Hezbollah, and therefore hugely in our interest. The optimum moment for safe, effective support to forces we favor passed long ago. Nonetheless, there may still be an opportunity to do something worthwhile.

John McCain is a grown man, a US Senator, a war veteran and a former POW. He has the right to go and see for himself.:cool:
Click to expand...

Heya Jack :2wave: .....So I guess the Final End Game would be to help the Hapless Sunni Muslims commit Genocide upon the Shia and Zaydi Muslims. Allow them to continue on to subjugate them and give them Rule over all of them or any that can survive their total desolation.

Hand over another Country that Sunni cannot take over by their own selves? All the while as they persecute others of different religions. Subjugate their own women and that New World Order format of Same Sex relationships. While at the same time always stabbing us in the back and using us to do the Work they Can't handle.

Then Hand over Iran and any other Shia ran Countries to the Sunni.....as once again. They will not be able to take care of anything on their own without the help of anyone else with their Ancient Dispute over who Should be the one to have Power and rule over all Muslims.

Do you think the Sunni will stop stabbing us in the back once they get all their Power?

Yeah McCain has the Right to go and see for himself. He also has the Right to have a foot put up his azz. I will volunteer.
 
the_recruit said:
The Free Syrian Army does not associate with Al-Nusra. Al-Nusra does not operate under the FSA command structure and they've actually engaged in skirmishes with each other over disputed territory.

Though, to the poorly informed such as yourself, they may appear to be one and the same.
Click to expand...

I think you are Mistaken on that.....greatly so.....evidenced. ;)

Syrian rebels defy US and pledge allegiance to jihadi group.....

SYRIA-CONFLICT-201_2423945b.jpg


Rebel groups across Syria are defying the United States by pledging their allegiance to a group that Washington will designate today a terrorist organization for its alleged links to al-Qaeda.

A total of 29 opposition groups, including fighting "brigades" and civilian committees, have signed a petition calling for mass demonstrations in support of Jabhat al-Nusra, an Islamist group which the White House believes is an offshoot of al-Qaeda in Iraq.

The petition is promoting the slogan "No to American intervention, for we are all Jabhat al-Nusra" and urges supporters to "raise the Jabhat al-Nusra flag" as a "thank you".

"These are the men for the people of Syria, these are the heroes who belong to us in religion, in blood and in revolution," read a statement widely circulated on Syrian opposition Facebook pages.

Although Jabhat al-Nusra remains separate from the Free Syrian Army, many FSA leaders now recognize its strength and order their forces to cooperate with it.....snip~

Syrian rebels defy US and pledge allegiance to jihadi group - Telegraph

Did you say something about the FSA not operating under Al Nusra? :roll:

Btw.....how did the Syrian Rebels get ManPads out of Libya? Considering the Saud and the Qataris don't have them to give away for sale?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Whose the lesser of two evils in the situation? Both sides suck.
Click to expand...

On this I agree with you TDS.....we should stay out of it. Yep and both sides sucks. Moreover I have asked before. What do the Rebels do if Assad lasts until the Election in 2014 and then steps down like he told the Russians? What then?

What will the Opposition have to say then when all along they have refused to have any talks with Assad or his people. Other than to say. Assad must go. So now if Assad lasts the year and has the Election and steps down.

Wont that make the Sunni Muslins and their Oppositions. Look like blathering fools? While all along highlighting all their atrocities. Now who can accept any of them in Power when they have lied, deceived the west. Use Children to stage attacks....Commit genocide upon Christians, and will use whatever underhanded dirty tactic they can to get back Assad. Including the use of chemical weapons should they get their hands on any.
 
solletica said:
Despite mccain's total lack of noodle, he does have some character (a trait virtually non-existent in Washington), given the way he conducted himself in the 2008 campaign.

If the story line of the Game Change movie is true, then he really did put principles above politics, and there's something to be said for that.
Click to expand...

Ummm, principles in politics??

Regardless. he doesn't need to be meddling behind closed doors. Where the Hell is that other idiot, Kerry?
 
Thrilla said:
he doesn't need anyone's OK...why would he? and whose permission would be needed?

additionally, we shouldn't get involved in their civil war.
Click to expand...

Funny how the extreme Jihad elements in these 'civil wars' always end up in control.

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” BHO
 
MMC said:
Did you consider the MB? You are aware that they are involved into this mix.....Correct?
Click to expand...

I am aware, and I am also aware that they are not Al Qaida. Perhaps you were referring to my question, instead? They would have to be pretty bad to as bad or worse than Assad. Do you think they would be, and if so why?

People may start to wonder why I keep turning the questions back on the people advocating one side or another in this conflict. The reason is that I have never heard anyone say anything that was substantively backed up that would cause me to want either side to win. So far, I am entirely unconvinced of any good outcome in Syria.
 
ecofarm said:
I don't care who the Syrians put in charge, as long as they can vote him out and not get bombed by their own military. Until the new government begins slaughtering civilians by the 10k, there's only success in the future.
Click to expand...

What on Earth convinces you that the rebels would hold free elections? You seem pretty certain about the outcome, so I am just curious what gave you that confidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom