• 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!

BREAKING: Dramatic Escalation in Syria

NIMBY said:
Is Rubio a nitwit also?

GOP lawmakers are much more supportive of trump in Syria than they were of Obama in Syria 4 years ago .
Click to expand...

Actually four years ago the rebels were winning. Then Russia stepped into the fray claiming to get involved to stop ISIS but instead was helping Assad with bombing runs on the rebel strongholds.

Congress has not formally declared war since World War II, but the War Powers Resolution of 1973 gives presidents authority to use military force for up to 90 days without congressional action. So why didn't Obama just retaliate in some way over the horrific chemical weapons attacks Assad used on his own people as he certainly had the power to do so. Why? Why? WhY??????????????????????????????????

Instead he just kept moving that damn red line. Enough! If Obama would have acted before Russia got involved over the chemical attacks Assad did on his own people and before the uprise of ISIS, Assad would be exiled in a remote location. But here we are!
 
NIMBY said:
Is Rubio a nitwit also?

GOP lawmakers are much more supportive of trump in Syria than they were of Obama in Syria 4 years ago .
Click to expand...

Yes.

If we had done something for the Anti-Assad groups in the very beginning and Assad was kicked out, things may have ended relatively okay. But now, with so many entities involved in this mess, any outcome would be disasterous.

Assad get's kicked out - Syria ends up like Somalia and Libya
Assad stays - Syria remains a dictatorship and strengthened by Russia.

No point in us getting involved in this cow flop of a situation.
 
vesper said:
Actually four years ago the rebels were winning. Then Russia stepped into the fray claiming to get involved to stop ISIS but instead was helping Assad with bombing runs on the rebel strongholds.

Congress has not formally declared war since World War II, but the War Powers Resolution of 1973 gives presidents authority to use military force for up to 90 days without congressional action. So why didn't Obama just retaliate in some way over the horrific chemical weapons attacks Assad used on his own people as he certainly had the power to do so. Why? Why? WhY??????????????????????????????????

Instead he just kept moving that damn red line. Enough! If Obama would have acted before Russia got involved over the chemical attacks Assad did on his own people and before the uprise of ISIS, Assad would be exiled in a remote location. But here we are!
Click to expand...

Typical Obama fumble: delay doing something and end result is things getting worse.
 
Praxas said:
That's funny since that is what trump told obama about attackong syria yet here we are anyway with the hypocrite in chief.
Click to expand...
Yup the question is why the change in his position. Something happened but what?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
robinfred said:
breaking_syria.png


According to trusted military sources of Inside Syria Media Center source in Syria, after the U.S. Tomahawk strikes on the Shayrat air base on April 7, the Russian side has taken measures to guarantee more security for its military in case the attack is repeated.

Sources have also claimed that two Russian all-purpose jets capable of spotting and intercepting cruise missiles are barraging in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If any attacks on the objects, where the Russian military are located (including the Hmeimim and Tartus bases), take place, the Russians are likely to carry out retaliatory strikes on the ships that launch cruise missiles.

As our source states, Russian military advisors have arrived in the Syrian AA defense system facilities to assist in tackling cruise missiles strikes.
Click to expand...

Lol....Ridiculous hyperbole. Two jets ?? ZOMG WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE !!!....

Russia doesn't want to go to war with the US or NATO or anyone else for that matter. Russia's economy is a mess right now with poverty rates shooting up to 2008 levels, a war with NATO would plunge Russia into depression and same goes for China.

America would shut down down Chinese shipping across the Pacific. Besides, Russian provacations have been going on for how long now ?? Its about time someone pushed back a bit
 
vesper said:
Actually four years ago the rebels were winning. Then Russia stepped into the fray claiming to get involved to stop ISIS but instead was helping Assad with bombing runs on the rebel strongholds.

Congress has not formally declared war since World War II, but the War Powers Resolution of 1973 gives presidents authority to use military force for up to 90 days without congressional action. So why didn't Obama just retaliate in some way over the horrific chemical weapons attacks Assad used on his own people as he certainly had the power to do so. Why? Why? WhY??????????????????????????????????

Instead he just kept moving that damn red line. Enough! If Obama would have acted before Russia got involved over the chemical attacks Assad did on his own people and before the uprise of ISIS, Assad would be exiled in a remote location. But here we are!
Click to expand...

Why did your GOP vote against Obama going in 4 years ago AFTER the UK voted not to go in?

Why no new AUMF from the GOP house 4 years ago or NOW ?

As much as war should not be political, you GOPosters make that impossible .
 
Roadvirus said:
Typical Obama fumble: delay doing something and end result is things getting worse.
Click to expand...

At least this president has GOP support for military action. Not so with Obama, who the GOP consistently stabbed in the back, after the mess they made before Obama .
 
PoS said:
You reap what you sow. Personally I think we ought to pull out and let the Russians handle this mess. No American life is worth going to war in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East for that matter.
Click to expand...

Trump thinks he's saving babies...or at least so he tells the idiots who support him.
 
robinfred said:
breaking_syria.png


According to trusted military sources of Inside Syria Media Center source in Syria, after the U.S. Tomahawk strikes on the Shayrat air base on April 7, the Russian side has taken measures to guarantee more security for its military in case the attack is repeated.

Sources have also claimed that two Russian all-purpose jets capable of spotting and intercepting cruise missiles are barraging in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If any attacks on the objects, where the Russian military are located (including the Hmeimim and Tartus bases), take place, the Russians are likely to carry out retaliatory strikes on the ships that launch cruise missiles.

As our source states, Russian military advisors have arrived in the Syrian AA defense system facilities to assist in tackling cruise missiles strikes.
Click to expand...

That is just standard procedure and saber rattling. No escalation.
 
NIMBY said:
At least this president has GOP support for military action. Not so with Obama, who the GOP consistently stabbed in the back, after the mess they made before Obama .
Click to expand...

Oh please. Obama's foreign policy blunders are his own.
Trumps decision to immediately respond to Assads chemical weapons attack highlights the Obama administrations gross negligence when it came to his ME agenda.

Obama knows Trumps foreign policy by contrast will expose a Obama ME agenda that included looking the other way as ISIS spread out accross the ME, supporting the Muslim Brotherhoods Egyptian takeover and flying 400 million dollars to Switzerland so it could be laundered and then flown into Tehran.

The video's of Susan Rice and John Kerry bragging about the Obama administrations amazing diplomatic achievment of removing "100 percent '' of Syria's chemical weapons ? Absolutely fantastic.

I dont buy into the whole karma thing, but that was pretty convicing.
John Kerry and Susan Rice are quentessential low life scum and its good to see people like on that scale exposed for what they are
 
Fenton said:
Oh please.
Click to expand...

Isn't it great having a GOP Congress that supports its president, whether it's foreign policy or domestic corruption and cover ups?

Look what that gave us from 2001--2009.

As I've said to others, GOPartisans have now made it impossible to have a bipartisan anything, now including foreign policy .
 
NIMBY said:
Isn't it great having a GOP Congress that supports its president, whether it's foreign policy or domestic corruption and cover ups?

Look what that gave us from 2001--2009.

As I've said to others, GOPartisans have now made it impossible to have a bipartisan anything, now including foreign policy .
Click to expand...

Lol !! 2011.....
Obama administration : Lybian action does not require Congressional approval.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...ional-approval/2011/06/15/AGLttOWH_story.html

John Kerry explaining to Charlie Rose that it was Obama's decision to bomb Syria that allowed them to cut the deal that eliminated 100 percent on Assads Chemical weapons....

:lamo

I shouldnt really be laughing. Thats the same idiot that brokered the Iran deal. Something tells me we got screwed in that deal
 
robinfred said:
breaking_syria.png


According to trusted military sources of Inside Syria Media Center source in Syria, after the U.S. Tomahawk strikes on the Shayrat air base on April 7, the Russian side has taken measures to guarantee more security for its military in case the attack is repeated.

Sources have also claimed that two Russian all-purpose jets capable of spotting and intercepting cruise missiles are barraging in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If any attacks on the objects, where the Russian military are located (including the Hmeimim and Tartus bases), take place, the Russians are likely to carry out retaliatory strikes on the ships that launch cruise missiles.

As our source states, Russian military advisors have arrived in the Syrian AA defense system facilities to assist in tackling cruise missiles strikes.
Click to expand...

Trusted military sources? From something called Inside Iraq? If I were President, I would base my policy on that data.

Even if true, 2 jets and an unspecified number of advisers doesn't seem to be much of a threat. Not even a token response.
 
reinoe said:
Obama wanted to go into Syria in order to help install ISIS with his Muslim brothers. Trump has no intention of installing ISIS.

And yes, Rubio is definitely a nitwit.
Click to expand...

The first part of your post shows that you have absolutely zero room to talk in regards to trying to call somebody else a nitwit.
 
NIMBY said:
Afraid of what GOPartisanship has done to my Nation, yes humbolt .
Click to expand...

I'm worried about precisely the opposite. Obama had exactly the same discretion to punish Syria as Trump has. Congress didn't stop him. He didn't want to act, and used congress as an excuse. You know this, so why did you offer congress as an excuse for Obama's failure to act?
 
robinfred said:
breaking_syria.png


According to trusted military sources of Inside Syria Media Center source in Syria, after the U.S. Tomahawk strikes on the Shayrat air base on April 7, the Russian side has taken measures to guarantee more security for its military in case the attack is repeated.

Sources have also claimed that two Russian all-purpose jets capable of spotting and intercepting cruise missiles are barraging in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If any attacks on the objects, where the Russian military are located (including the Hmeimim and Tartus bases), take place, the Russians are likely to carry out retaliatory strikes on the ships that launch cruise missiles.

As our source states, Russian military advisors have arrived in the Syrian AA defense system facilities to assist in tackling cruise missiles strikes.
Click to expand...

They would be crazy to attack US assets that were hitting the Syrian regime. Why they didn't even do anything, when the Turks downed their plane. Putin does not want a war with the US or Nato. He wants to destabilise Europe and Nato. It is true that an Article 5 situation would put stress on the EU and Nato. But the risk doesn't seem worth it for Putin. Of course he might have hidden preferences.
 
reinoe said:
The U.S. gains nothing in Syria. In fact U.S. actions in Syria are negative value. Russia has a definite strategic interest in Syria while the U.S. does not. Furthermore the U.S. is siding with ISIS/AL-QAEDA/TERRORISTS by trying to overthrow Assad.
Click to expand...

The problem is that those strategic interests are opposite to thise of the US. Allowing Putin to achieve them would be worse for the Europeans in the short run. Middle term the costs to the US would almost certainly be very painful nonetheless.
 
Harshaw said:
Whoever wrote this has a tenuous grasp on English.
Click to expand...

It is better than the understanding of security affairs demonstrated in it.
 
Roadvirus said:
Yes.

If we had done something for the Anti-Assad groups in the very beginning and Assad was kicked out, things may have ended relatively okay. But now, with so many entities involved in this mess, any outcome would be disasterous.
Click to expand...

There was no good choice in the beginning, either. It's always been a majority of extremists. There is literally no way to hold power in that region without being at least a little bit extremist. If not, then the factions get out of line and everyone kills each other. The dynamics at play there is different than other nations and why the same systems of government will not work.
 
Fenton said:
Russia doesn't want to go to war with the US or NATO or anyone else for that matter. Russia's economy is a mess right now with poverty rates shooting up to 2008 levels, a war with NATO would plunge Russia into depression and same goes for China.
Click to expand...

Huh? You miss the history lesson covering the motivations that lead up to WWII? What you said above is literally one of the biggest variables that pushed Germany into a war stance.

America would shut down down Chinese shipping across the Pacific. Besides, Russian provacations have been going on for how long now ?? Its about time someone pushed back a bit
Click to expand...

Lol...Russian provocations? You spell the U.S. and NATO provocations wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom