Syria

Options
12467…13

Comments

  • aerial
    aerial Posts: 2,319
    What do the Syrian rebels want exactly?

    Looks like a million person march on Washington is a must if they back the Muslim Brotherhood........or get involved with this mess
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • dimitrispearljam
    dimitrispearljam Posts: 139,724
    catefrances wrote:
    so when our friends use chemical weapons its ok but when an enemy does the same its time to get our war on??? H
    .

    exactly....why USA need to get involved in this??

    oh wait...

    "Syria is the only significant crude oil producing country in the Eastern Mediterranean region,"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Syria
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • JimmyV
    JimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,597
    dimitrispearljam wrote:
    catefrances wrote:
    so when our friends use chemical weapons its ok but when an enemy does the same its time to get our war on??? H
    .

    exactly....why USA need to get involved in this??

    oh wait...

    "Syria is the only significant crude oil producing country in the Eastern Mediterranean region,"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Syria

    I wish I could say this wasn't true...but I can't.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    aerial wrote:
    What do the Syrian rebels want exactly?

    Looks like a million person march on Washington is a must if they back the Muslim Brotherhood........or get involved with this mess
    ...
    It is not the Muslim Brotherhood... it is al Qaeda and Hezbollah that are part of the driving forces of the rebellion.
    Those whom are calling to arm the rebels (Sen. McCain, Graham, Chambliss, etc...) want to arm al Qaeda.
    What happens if they win? Who's in charge?
    Answer: al Qaeda and Hezbollah.
    But, of course, al Qaeda will return the weapons after the rebellions succeeds, right?
    ...
    Stay out of Syria.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Cosmo wrote:
    aerial wrote:
    What do the Syrian rebels want exactly?

    Looks like a million person march on Washington is a must if they back the Muslim Brotherhood........or get involved with this mess
    ...
    It is not the Muslim Brotherhood... it is al Qaeda and Hezbollah that are part of the driving forces of the rebellion.
    Those whom are calling to arm the rebels (Sen. McCain, Graham, Chambliss, etc...) want to arm al Qaeda.
    What happens if they win? Who's in charge?
    Answer: al Qaeda and Hezbollah.
    But, of course, al Qaeda will return the weapons after the rebellions succeeds, right?
    ...
    Stay out of Syria.

    Sorry but Hezbollah is NOT part of the rebels. They have assad's back.
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    Stay out of Syria.


    :thumbup:
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • dimitrispearljam
    dimitrispearljam Posts: 139,724
    catefrances wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    Stay out of Syria.


    :thumbup:
    +1 best advice in a long time..
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    edited May 2013
    badbrains wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    aerial wrote:
    What do the Syrian rebels want exactly?

    Looks like a million person march on Washington is a must if they back the Muslim Brotherhood........or get involved with this mess
    ...
    It is not the Muslim Brotherhood... it is al Qaeda and Hezbollah that are part of the driving forces of the rebellion.
    Those whom are calling to arm the rebels (Sen. McCain, Graham, Chambliss, etc...) want to arm al Qaeda.
    What happens if they win? Who's in charge?
    Answer: al Qaeda and Hezbollah.
    But, of course, al Qaeda will return the weapons after the rebellions succeeds, right?
    ...
    Stay out of Syria.

    Sorry but Hezbollah is NOT part of the rebels. They have assad's back.
    ...
    Yeah... I forgot that Hezbollah are Shia.
    Still... there is a pretty solid backing by al Qaeda elements. and personally, I don't think arming members of al Qaeda is a good idea. Remember that old saying... "The Enemy of My Enemy is still al Fucking Qaeda... so, arming them is pretty fucking stupid".
    Let Iran get entangled in that shithole mess and have al Qaeda fuck with them, instead of us.
    Post edited by Cosmo on
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • peacefrompaul
    peacefrompaul Posts: 25,293
    300px-Mortar_attack_on_Shigal_Tarna_garrison,_Kunar_Province,_87.jpg
  • redrock
    redrock Posts: 18,341
    Sunni vs Shi'ite. Sectarian violence that will not end with Assad's demise. The US (or any other Western country) backing one or the other is a very dangerous move that will come back and bite them.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    redrock wrote:
    Sunni vs Shi'ite. Sectarian violence that will not end with Assad's demise. The US (or any other Western country) backing one or the other is a very dangerous move that will come back and bite them.

    how so?

    when your goal is war profiteering and political instability and economic imperialism ... what is the blowback? ... if there are attacks on US citizens - that's just further motivation for the above ...
  • riotgrl
    riotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    polaris_x wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    Sunni vs Shi'ite. Sectarian violence that will not end with Assad's demise. The US (or any other Western country) backing one or the other is a very dangerous move that will come back and bite them.

    how so?

    when your goal is war profiteering and political instability and economic imperialism ... what is the blowback? ... if there are attacks on US citizens - that's just further motivation for the above ...

    Terrorism? I know the CIA says they never trained bin Laden but there is, to my knowledge, to definitive proof that he wasn't a part of the Afghan Mujaheddin that we did train.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    riotgrl wrote:
    Terrorism? I know the CIA says they never trained bin Laden but there is, to my knowledge, to definitive proof that he wasn't a part of the Afghan Mujaheddin that we did train.

    terrorism is not an unwanted outcome ... when your goal is to profit from war by selling guns and choppers and tanks and bullets ... you need to live in a world of violence ... you don't have afghanistan and iraq without 9/11 ... you can't pass orwellian legislations without the threat of violence and terrorism ...

    look at the israeli/palestine conflict ... israel would not be able to get away with everything it does if it wasn't for the periodic rocket attack, suicide bomber or threat of it ...

    the people won't easily give up their civil liberties unless there is that threat ... axis of evil ... wmds ... terrorists! ... drilling for fear makes the job simple ...
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,289
    polaris_x wrote:
    riotgrl wrote:
    Terrorism? I know the CIA says they never trained bin Laden but there is, to my knowledge, to definitive proof that he wasn't a part of the Afghan Mujaheddin that we did train.

    terrorism is not an unwanted outcome ... when your goal is to profit from war by selling guns and choppers and tanks and bullets ... you need to live in a world of violence ... you don't have afghanistan and iraq without 9/11 ... you can't pass orwellian legislations without the threat of violence and terrorism ...

    look at the israeli/palestine conflict ... israel would not be able to get away with everything it does if it wasn't for the periodic rocket attack, suicide bomber or threat of it ...

    the people won't easily give up their civil liberties unless there is that threat ... axis of evil ... wmds ... terrorists! ... drilling for fear makes the job simple ...
    tin hat territory. just say’n
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • redrock
    redrock Posts: 18,341
    polaris_x wrote:
    redrock wrote:
    Sunni vs Shi'ite. Sectarian violence that will not end with Assad's demise. The US (or any other Western country) backing one or the other is a very dangerous move that will come back and bite them.

    how so?.

    Countries such as the US, by backing a certain group of people against their current government/leader, count on this group to 'win' ,installing a democracy instead of dictatorship or government not to their liking, etc. (yadidadida as we've heard many times before). Obviously banking on the new leaders to have a more 'positive relationship' with the US. How wrong can that be in the Middle East (latest one Egypt..). Doesn't go to plan.... Very simply put but I think you get the drift...
  • JimmyV
    JimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,597
    polaris_x wrote:
    riotgrl wrote:
    Terrorism? I know the CIA says they never trained bin Laden but there is, to my knowledge, to definitive proof that he wasn't a part of the Afghan Mujaheddin that we did train.

    terrorism is not an unwanted outcome ... when your goal is to profit from war by selling guns and choppers and tanks and bullets ... you need to live in a world of violence ... you don't have afghanistan and iraq without 9/11 ... you can't pass orwellian legislations without the threat of violence and terrorism ...

    look at the israeli/palestine conflict ... israel would not be able to get away with everything it does if it wasn't for the periodic rocket attack, suicide bomber or threat of it ...

    the people won't easily give up their civil liberties unless there is that threat ... axis of evil ... wmds ... terrorists! ... drilling for fear makes the job simple ...

    Exactly whose goal is "to profit from war by selling guns and choppers and tanks and bullets"?
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    JimmyV wrote:
    Exactly whose goal is "to profit from war by selling guns and choppers and tanks and bullets"?

    the military industrial complex
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,289
    polaris_x wrote:
    JimmyV wrote:
    Exactly whose goal is "to profit from war by selling guns and choppers and tanks and bullets"?

    the military industrial complex
    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS5CYNbdpNKrCue61ORc2PXFGE1WAO3veXA5MKL9zyFddCQUlii
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • riotgrl
    riotgrl LOUISVILLE Posts: 1,895
    Jason P wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    riotgrl wrote:
    Terrorism? I know the CIA says they never trained bin Laden but there is, to my knowledge, to definitive proof that he wasn't a part of the Afghan Mujaheddin that we did train.

    terrorism is not an unwanted outcome ... when your goal is to profit from war by selling guns and choppers and tanks and bullets ... you need to live in a world of violence ... you don't have afghanistan and iraq without 9/11 ... you can't pass orwellian legislations without the threat of violence and terrorism ...

    look at the israeli/palestine conflict ... israel would not be able to get away with everything it does if it wasn't for the periodic rocket attack, suicide bomber or threat of it ...

    the people won't easily give up their civil liberties unless there is that threat ... axis of evil ... wmds ... terrorists! ... drilling for fear makes the job simple ...
    tin hat territory. just say’n

    Let's phrase this a bit differently then. US foreign policy, for much of our history, has to do with "saving" others from "dictatorships" or other 'undesirable' forms of government, right? And this going all the way to the 1820s Monroe Doctrine and the resulting change over time in regards to the very clear reasoning behind profiting from European involvement in WWI and WWII. Is it really that far out of line with what polaris said? His reasoning makes it sound like tin hat conspiracy mentality but very clearly the US has chosen to intervene in numerous conflicts around the world, and while part of our motivation might be to protect other nations from rogue dictators, the very clear intent has been to 'protect' our economic interests. Doesn't seem like a huge stretch to say that we might "favor" or "look the other way" in regards to perpetrating violence to suit our own needs.
    Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?

    Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...

    I AM MINE
  • JimmyV
    JimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,597
    riotgrl wrote:

    Let's phrase this a bit differently then. US foreign policy, for much of our history, has to do with "saving" others from "dictatorships" or other 'undesirable' forms of government, right? And this going all the way to the 1820s Monroe Doctrine and the resulting change over time in regards to the very clear reasoning behind profiting from European involvement in WWI and WWII. Is it really that far out of line with what polaris said? His reasoning makes it sound like tin hat conspiracy mentality but very clearly the US has chosen to intervene in numerous conflicts around the world, and while part of our motivation might be to protect other nations from rogue dictators, the very clear intent has been to 'protect' our economic interests. Doesn't seem like a huge stretch to say that we might "favor" or "look the other way" in regards to perpetrating violence to suit our own needs.

    This I don't disagree with at all. As I said earlier in the thread regarding oil as a reason, I wish I could disagree but I cannot.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."

Categories