• 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!

do you think that the USA will invade Syria?

Do you think that the USA will invade/occupy Syria?

  • yes

    Votes: 9 21.4%

  • no

    Votes: 33 78.6%

  • I don't care

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    42
A

alanford

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
59
Reaction score
9
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
if you think Trump will do it, what is the reason for that?
if you think Trump will not do it, why?

I believe Trump will do it.
It looks that American billionaires don’t give up from the oil pipeline (Qatar-->Europe through Syria and Turkey) or simply they (defense contractors, the cia/dod) prolong the war to make a profit from the war itself.
They want to make the same situation like in Iraq where Americans decide everything. it means, if rebels/terrorists are destroyed by Russia, Americans will come instead of rebels and Syria will be the same like Iraq. then they will be able to make a pipeline.
 
The USA doesn't need another mess like Bush created with his war in Iraq.
 
Absolutely. Trump with his air strikes showed he was just another Neo-con that loves to use the military as a tool of aggression.
 
I don't think Russia will let him, and I don't think (at least, I hope) that the rest of the government won't let him start WW3 over it.
 
there are too many factors at play to make an accurate prediction, but if it's a one or the other, i'd guess no. Russia has made it clear that Assad is their Kim Jong Un, and an occupation won't be permitted without significant blowback up to and including direct war with Russia. of course, we have to take into account that we have an egomaniac in charge of the military now, and he can't even back down from a twitter feud, so who knows how close to the cliff he would take the US before hitting the brakes. however, it appears that Russia was warned in advance to get their troops away from that airbase, so it's possible that more is going on behind the scenes than meets the eye.
 
No invasion (I could support a safe-zone with strong international cooperation).

Syria is not a strategic US national interest and the Russian Federation is the Damascus government patron. Syria is a slaughterhouse where war crimes occur on an almost daily basis.

The US should limit in-country activities to striking IS/AQ via air assets and providing intelligence/weapons/supplies to allied Kurdish forces encircling the IS capital of Raqqa.
 
Syria doesn't have oil.
 
Henrin said:
Absolutely. Trump with his air strikes showed he was just another Neo-con that loves to use the military as a tool of aggression.
Click to expand...

Did you consider Clinton's attacks on Sudan and Bosnia an act of aggression? Not sure what a military attack on a pill factory and/or bombing the Chinese embassy accomplished. But again it was Clinton and not Trump...right?
 
No. His supporters wouldn't like it and Russia wouldn't like it.
 
alanford said:
if you think Trump will do it, what is the reason for that?
if you think Trump will not do it, why?

I believe Trump will do it.
It looks that American billionaires don’t give up from the oil pipeline (Qatar-->Europe through Syria and Turkey) or simply they (defense contractors, the cia/dod) prolong the war to make a profit from the war itself.
They want to make the same situation like in Iraq where Americans decide everything. it means, if rebels/terrorists are destroyed by Russia, Americans will come instead of rebels and Syria will be the same like Iraq. then they will be able to make a pipeline.
Click to expand...

It would be political suicide for him to want that. Of course, that's if nothing "bigger" happens. We need Russia with us on this. I'm sure we're working behind the scenes...
 
shrubnose said:
The USA doesn't need another mess like Bush created with his war in Iraq.
Click to expand...

If that were the case why did Obama put troops in Syria and back in Iraq? After eight years of Obama timid approach to Syria, are you still claiming that was Bush's fault?
 
antiquity said:
Did you consider Clinton's attacks on Sudan and Bosnia an act of aggression? Not sure what a military attack on a pill factory and/or bombing the Chinese embassy accomplished. But again it was Clinton and not Trump...right?
Click to expand...

Yes. Clinton's foreign policy was built entirely on using the military as tool of aggression.
 
A military coup is the most likely outcome. All Russia want is the damn port, and all we want is for Syria to stop being Irans damn arms depot for Hezbollah.

A military coup may engineer both outcomes for their own benefit.
 
antiquity said:
Did you consider Clinton's attacks on Sudan and Bosnia an act of aggression? Not sure what a military attack on a pill factory and/or bombing the Chinese embassy accomplished. But again it was Clinton and not Trump...right?
Click to expand...

The Chinese were spying and trying to snoop on our hardware and military capability, and had one chat too many with Russian generals. "spy on this, biatch!"
 
That is the stuff of fantasy. There is almost no political support in this country for an invasion which would involve hundreds of thousands of troops. An invasion would also bring the U.S. into direct conflict with Russian forces.
 
alanford said:
if you think Trump will do it, what is the reason for that?
if you think Trump will not do it, why?

I believe Trump will do it.
It looks that American billionaires don’t give up from the oil pipeline (Qatar-->Europe through Syria and Turkey) or simply they (defense contractors, the cia/dod) prolong the war to make a profit from the war itself.
They want to make the same situation like in Iraq where Americans decide everything. it means, if rebels/terrorists are destroyed by Russia, Americans will come instead of rebels and Syria will be the same like Iraq. then they will be able to make a pipeline.
Click to expand...

Anyone who thinks that it is the contractors who control foreign policy haven't been paying attention the past few years to the cuts to contractor compensation. The big companies aren't really interested in foreign policy, they are interested in acquisition policy, because that is where the money is.

No, we aren't about to invade and occupy Syria. We are not willing to do so, nor have we forward-stationed the necessary force to do so.

The idea that Americans currently decide everything in Iraq is hilarious. Iraqi politics are currently an intramural fight between Shia factions. There is an outside power which exerts undue influence over that struggle, but that power is Iran, not the United States.
 
alanford said:
if you think Trump will do it, what is the reason for that?
if you think Trump will not do it, why?

I believe Trump will do it.
It looks that American billionaires don’t give up from the oil pipeline (Qatar-->Europe through Syria and Turkey) or simply they (defense contractors, the cia/dod) prolong the war to make a profit from the war itself.
They want to make the same situation like in Iraq where Americans decide everything. it means, if rebels/terrorists are destroyed by Russia, Americans will come instead of rebels and Syria will be the same like Iraq. then they will be able to make a pipeline.
Click to expand...

Only god knows, as i'm not confident the president does.

“There is no emerging doctrine for Trump foreign policy in a classical sense,” said Kathleen H. Hicks, a former Pentagon official who is now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “There are, however, clear emerging characteristics consistent with the attributes of the man himself: unpredictable, instinctual and undisciplined.”
Click to expand...

57736fa43940d986da5066e7fc39285e.jpg
 
alanford said:
if you think Trump will do it, what is the reason for that?
if you think Trump will not do it, why?

I believe Trump will do it.
It looks that American billionaires don’t give up from the oil pipeline (Qatar-->Europe through Syria and Turkey) or simply they (defense contractors, the cia/dod) prolong the war to make a profit from the war itself.
They want to make the same situation like in Iraq where Americans decide everything. it means, if rebels/terrorists are destroyed by Russia, Americans will come instead of rebels and Syria will be the same like Iraq. then they will be able to make a pipeline.
Click to expand...

We get most of our oil from Canada. This "it's for the oil" conspiracy theory is ages old, and also totally nonsensical. If you aren't going to update your conspiracy theories, then why are you spouting them?
 
I think it is a distraction. "Oh no, they're about to find out I'm working with the Russians! LOOK A DISTRACTION!" *Putin bombs Syrian civilians*
 
Where is the "Christ, I hope not" option on the poll? That's my vote. There is no telling what this SCROTUS is going to do.
 
In this case, it would be a proxy war with Russia, since Putin supports Assad. So no.
 
antiquity said:
If that were the case why did Obama put troops in Syria and back in Iraq? After eight years of Obama timid approach to Syria, are you still claiming that was Bush's fault?
Click to expand...

Yes, the mess in Iraq, the resurgence of Iran, the creation of ISIS, all Bush's fault for invading Iraq in the first place. That doesn't mean I agree with Obama's policy towards Syria, I think the "red line" and that not doing anything about it was a disaster. Moreover, I think that Trump did the right thing by hitting Syria in response to Asaad's chemical weapons attack on his own people. Just the same, the world would undoubtably be a lot better place today had Bush not invaded Iraq and simply continued on with the policy of containment that the Bush Sr and Clinton administrations had.
 
chuckiechan said:
The Chinese were spying and trying to snoop on our hardware and military capability, and had one chat too many with Russian generals. "spy on this, biatch!"
Click to expand...

The Chinese were spying on the US in Belgrade? Now that is funny.
 
Tigerace117 said:
We get most of our oil from Canada. This "it's for the oil" conspiracy theory is ages old, and also totally nonsensical. If you aren't going to update your conspiracy theories, then why are you spouting them?
Click to expand...

Not true but close:

gr-oilprod-300.gif


Actually as you can see we still get most of our oil right here in the US.
 
antiquity said:
Not true but close:

gr-oilprod-300.gif


Actually as you can see we still get most of our oil right here in the US.
Click to expand...

A valid point. I was referring to the countries were we import outrage oil from, but I was less than specific in that regard. Your graph brings up an even more valid point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom