Menu
By:
Filters
What's new

Syria...

tr1age

tr1age

Administrator
Staff member
Have you all read about this?

We are looking at another war here...

Just curious if anyone is following it and wants to talk about it.
 
Nothing good will come of this.

We hoped that public condemnation and threats of reprisal would convince Assad to keep a lid on the Bond villain stuff, but now that he's (allegedly) called our bluff, we risk losing diplomatic clout in future human rights disputes if we don't do anything. But anything we could do would destabilize an already ravaged region, cost another decade of money and human lives, and piss off China and Russia. A proxy war with two of the most powerful countries in the world is not the way to avert financial ruin.

And as nasty as Assad is, certain rebel groups are backed by Al Qaeda. Are we really going to deploy soldiers to Syria and order them to protect the people they just spent a decade fighting?

It is a mistake to get involved. It is a mistake not to get involved. Our only hope is for Obama to find a way to hack the Kobayashi Maru test.
 
There is probably going to be an on going war of some type in that general area.
We will most likely have to get our information from the small, legit media outlets If we want to avoid political posturing bullshit and the like that is rampant in the mainstream.

Sad times :( .
 
Do you think we will end up fighting there? I don't see a way out of this one. Shit is biblical at this point.
 
Obama's probably just going to try firing missiles from nearby ships rather than deploying ground forces. But Russia's set up a pretty strong naval presence to prevent exactly that, so things will get... tense.
 
Red Omen said:
Obama's probably just going to try firing missiles from nearby ships rather than deploying ground forces. But Russia's set up a pretty strong naval presence to prevent exactly that, so things will get... tense.
Click to expand...
Can you explain what you mean with Russian setting up to prevent what?
 
And there goes the last and only positive point I had to say about Obama: He didn´t start a new war.

I read a funny tweet this morning:"Because we don´t like to see people in Syria getting murdered, we drop bombs on them. I don´t get it."
The problem is that everybody is pretty much unable to help because both sides are bad.
Syrian government uses chemical weapons and the resistance are a lot of very radical groups.
 
What other way better to stimulate the American economy than by having another war! Cause... you know... it worked so well all those other times. Oh wait...
 
I'm surprised no one here in Puerto Rico is talking about this... I understand it's not puerto rican news, but aren't we US territory. Doesn't that mean it affects us as well?

I just can't believe it. Weren't things dying down? Now this.
 
Why can't this be someone else's problem for a change? :(

Sent from Droid Razr Maxx HD via Tapatalk
 
"Tuesday, a fifth guided-missile destroyer, the USS Stout, also entered the Mediterranean, through the Straights of Gibraltar, but officials said it wouldn't take part in any cruise missile attack."

I remember reading some kind of doomsday prophecy that started this way, in the Straights of Gibraltar. Anyway...what else is new. Murica is the world police, correct. Everyone hates us, everyone needs us.


An interesting documentary (available on Netflix last I checked) about the US pulling out ALL forces and shutting down ALL bases outside the US and letting foreign countries fend for themselves. The demons would run amok.
 
I don't think Obama is viewed as being tough on international issues. Assad figured he could get away with whatever he wanted, and so far he's been right. It's been months since Assad first used chemical weapons. We should have taken a much harder stance on it then, but we didn't. So Assad just kept ramping up and now Obama is being forced to act, but now we have no initiative. Which is bad for military actions.

I do believe that if America has the power to stop atrocities and we choose to stay out of it, it's immoral. If we see a murderer and we can stop him but we don't, won't we all end up with Peter Parker angst? No one wants that noise.

I know everyone wants to believe that people are inherently reasonable and if they just had enough food, water, roofs over their heads, and a flatscreen TV, they will be content and just leave everyone else alone, but its just not the case. Or rather, we don't know if it's the case or not because people hoard the flatscreens instead of sharing. Because people are greedy.

So now we've got this situation in Syria, and we really don't know what will screw the world more- Assad winning or rebels winning. What is clear to me, we (and I mean the reasonable people of the world at large) should not allow the use of chemical or biological weapons. We just don't want wars to go down that route. They will inevitably be used, but we can hold off that horror at least a little while by responding strongly against those that use them. So far the President has been back pedaling and weak in his response. Hopefully, he can also be strong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom