Game Changer in Syria?

245678

Comments

  • satansbedsatansbed Posts: 2,139
    chadwick wrote:
    i totally get all that & it is sad as shit & costly as fuck. yet every single powerful/semi powerful nation should help another nation or even a single person in dire need of aid as that is our responsibilities.
    as a decent person i feel sad as fuck that some crazy wannabe bullshit leader & his regime of lunatics are setting of chemical warfare bombs or sprays or however the gases are let loose.

    in all reality... countries in south america, north america, asia, europe & africa should team up with their decent & solid people & shelter those whom cannot defend themselves & remove them & place them in safety until some crazy cocksucker(s) are physically removed from their lives

    it is not solely up to the united states, it is up to everyone, everyone gives 110% to protecting innocent lives who cannot defend themselves. crazy nutjobs need removing & 79 plus countries could get it done quite easily

    example:
    wtf? germany forever has enjoyed conflicts... why are they sitting on their fat asses while decent common small people are being poisoned to death by some freak show bullshit leader or whoever he his?


    Eh..... im not sure you could characterise Germany as having enjoyed conflicts........ and even then. name one they have been involved in since ww2.

    the main reason there is an expectation for the US to get involved is that it spends way way more on military than any other country combined.

    France wants to go, England wants to go, but they aren't going unless they know they have U.S backing


    for example

    "Mr Cameron interrupted his holiday in Cornwall for talks with Mr Obama, François Hollande, the French president, and Angela Merkel, the German chancellor. After discussions via a secure telephone line over the weekend, all the leaders agreed on the need for a “serious response”. Government sources confirmed that military action was among the options “on the table” but said no decisions had been taken."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... Syria.html
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,138
    satansbed wrote:
    Eh..... im not sure you could characterise Germany as having enjoyed conflicts........ and even then. name one they have been involved in since ww2.
    The rest of the world tends to keep better tabs on you after you try to take over the world and exterminate a major segment of the population. Although it should be noted that Germany is one of the major contributers in the war in Afghanistan.
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,138
    Kerry is sounding the war drums this afternoon.

    I don't know anyone who wants us to be involved in this war besides our leaders. Sure, we can easily go there and use the country as a weapons testing ground. That part we are good at, the blowing up shit part.

    Today is the 2 year anniversy of Libya overthrow. The first article that popped up was titled "Violent Chaos".

    :fp:

    http://rt.com/news/libya-gaddafi-fall-anniversary-981/
  • satansbedsatansbed Posts: 2,139
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wor ... civil-war/

    This isn't going to be a boots on the ground war, for a while anyway
  • petejm043petejm043 Posts: 156
    satansbed wrote:
    petejm043 wrote:
    chadwick wrote:
    as human beings it is our duty in this life to help fellow human beings. it is not up to the united states, it is up to everyone across this planet to give a fuck about others. if someone has the means to aid those in dire need they had better get off their asses & do so

    this is how i feel about things as we are all one. helping others helps ourselves

    Yes if there is an international coalition that is built up then that is different. We as a nation cant keep trying to save everyone... we cant afford it. We keep spending trillions of dollars in aid to Pakistan, Egypt, and other places and the people or most of the people do not like us.


    Actually foreign aid is just under 50 billion, out of a total government budget of 3.8 trillion

    which is 1.3% of the total US budget, thats basically money the government finds behind the couch

    Your are correct it is just under $50 billion. But don't you think that that money can be better spent here in are own country?
  • petejm043petejm043 Posts: 156
    chadwick wrote:
    i totally get all that & it is sad as shit & costly as fuck. yet every single powerful/semi powerful nation should help another nation or even a single person in dire need of aid as that is our responsibilities.
    as a decent person i feel sad as fuck that some crazy wannabe bullshit leader & his regime of lunatics are setting of chemical warfare bombs or sprays or however the gases are let loose.

    in all reality... countries in south america, north america, asia, europe & africa should team up with their decent & solid people & shelter those whom cannot defend themselves & remove them & place them in safety until some crazy cocksucker(s) are physically removed from their lives

    it is not solely up to the united states, it is up to everyone, everyone gives 110% to protecting innocent lives who cannot defend themselves. crazy nutjobs need removing & 79 plus countries could get it done quite easily

    example:
    wtf? germany forever has enjoyed conflicts... why are they sitting on their fat asses while decent common small people are being poisoned to death by some freak show bullshit leader or whoever he his?

    If a coalition is formed and other countries share the burden, that changes things because the world community would be telling Syria that you cannot kill your own people. But isn't this what happen in Libya as well? And at the end we lost three Americans there last year. I don't know...I guess I am just tired of all these wars.
  • chadwickchadwick Posts: 21,157
    war sucks.

    no matter what, when innocent folks are gassed to death something has to happen to those responsible
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • satansbedsatansbed Posts: 2,139
    petejm043 wrote:

    Your are correct it is just under $50 billion. But don't you think that that money can be better spent here in are own country?

    well its not my country, but even if it was i would say no, the effects of not spending this money would be much worse than the benefits of spending it at home for america
  • I understand that we shouldn't be the World Police and it will cost us money, but if we don't then how can we live with ourselves knowing that so many people died and we could have done something. That is the reason I don't feel as much hatred towards Bush for the Iraq War as I once did (although I am still very mad at him for it because it was a main focus instead of finding Osama).

    If we, England, France, and anyone else joins, then that would be fantastic. If no one else helps, that says more about them than it does about us. We are willing to help those who cannot fight evil. To say no just to save a few dollars is logical, but it kind of shows an immoral side to someone (Money > Innocent Lives).

    However, I am not for giving the Syrian Rebels weapons. I would like for us to do something that would have us not working alongside the rebels. Instead, we should just end it swiftly as possible.
    ~Carter~

    You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
    or you can come to terms and realize
    you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
    makes much more sense to live in the present tense
    - Present Tense
  • petejm043petejm043 Posts: 156
    satansbed wrote:
    petejm043 wrote:

    Your are correct it is just under $50 billion. But don't you think that that money can be better spent here in are own country?

    well its not my country, but even if it was i would say no, the effects of not spending this money would be much worse than the benefits of spending it at home for america

    Why would you say it would be worse? I know I am in the very small minority here, but I believe that the United States should return to isolationism.
  • petejm043petejm043 Posts: 156
    chadwick wrote:
    war sucks.

    no matter what, when innocent folks are gassed to death something has to happen to those responsible

    I understand where you are coming from. My parents lost their country and some of my other family members were executed or shoved in a prison because they disagreed with the new regime. I just feel like we are getting caught in the middle. If we are going to give humanitarian aid to Syria, am all for that. But to shed more American blood...I just cant see me going for that.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    Did we supply the chemical weapons like we did when saddam used them? You guys forget history rather quickly.
  • callencallen Posts: 6,388
    chadwick wrote:
    war sucks.

    no matter what, when innocent folks are gassed to death something has to happen to those responsible
    We don't know who used chemical weapons. Remember wmd's.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • callencallen Posts: 6,388
    satansbed wrote:
    FRENCH PRESIDENT FRANCOIS Hollande said today that evidence indicated Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime had carried out chemical weapons attacks on its own people last week.
    Hollande said there was “a body of evidence indicating that the 21 August attack was chemical in nature, and that everything led to the belief that the Syrian regime was responsible for this unspeakable act”.
    The French president called for UN weapons inspectors to be given access to suspect sites “without delay and without any restrictions whatsoever”, in a statement released by his office after he held telephone talks on the situation in Syria with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.


    http://www.thejournal.ie/hollande-assad ... itter_self
    Blaming opponents for dastardly acts is used repeatedly by the us and its allies.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    obama and kerry have our best interest in mind..... :lol: it's way past time to impeach :evil:

    Godfather.


    The Obama administration was inching closer to a decision on how and whether to strike Syria, after Secretary of State John Kerry and the White House both declared that the evidence showing chemical weapons were used in a deadly attack last week is "undeniable."

    "What is before us today is real, and it is compelling," Kerry said.

    Administration officials, signaling they might not wait until U.N. inspectors finalize their own investigation, now say that the international community must respond to the use of chemical weapons. The comments from top U.S. officials on Monday signaled a shift in tone, with military action looking more likely than it did just a day or two ago.



    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08 ... z2dAg9ka84
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    edited August 2013
    What will impeachment solve? Nothing. I hate Obama's policies but even if you had the votes to convict nothing would change. It's a waste of time.

    If we want to fix things it's time to defund about everything. Then we start from scratch and strictly follow the Constitution and end the Fed. That's our only hope.
    Post edited by unsung on
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    unsung wrote:
    What will impeachment solve? Nothing. I hate Obama's policies but even if you had the votes to convict nothing would change. It's a waste of time.

    If we want to fix things it's time to defund about everything.

    you are probably right but getting that idiot out of office wouyld be a great thing to see.


    Godfather.
  • ajedigeckoajedigecko Posts: 2,430
    when we begin war with Syria...it does not need to be long. we have the means to make it quick.

    our problem...we do not like quick war.









    kiss of death
    live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,727
    They better not fucking get us involved in another war.

    cocksuckers

    also fuck John McCain and his bloodlust
  • "GET YOUR WAR ON!!!!"
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • chadwickchadwick Posts: 21,157
    nailing a handfull of nasty shits isn't a war is it? i highly doubt 14,000 evil fuckers from syria set of chemical weapons against syrians.

    a bunk ass small group of monsters can be removed from existence with very little energy & force used. a couple groups of navy seals & green berets very easily can remove disgusting chemical warfare shits.

    or frig it... drop a bomb on the heads of these pricks

    to me & my way of thinking, this is not a war but a simple way of removing dangerous freaks from syrian society which is suffering & these syrians seem to be incapable of defending themselves

    in reality, school yard bullies will be put in check & removed sooner or later

    it is my belief system that allows me to have the thought of reaching out to aid anyone suffering who cannot help themselves. as a fellow living & breathing person, i cannot support walking away. we are fully capable of lending a loving hand to cradle & protect those unable to shield themselves against some twisted ass folks

    i am against war. perhaps this operation could be done with zero fighting. the world's people should accept this journey, reach out & care about those suffering. turning our backs on those treated horrificly only proves we are selfish cowards
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    Something is not right. The US stated that it would not interfere in Syria unless there was use of WMDs (chemical weapons). With all that Ahssad has been through and the fact that he has hung on this long - Why would the Syrian government use chemical weapons against its people, after all this time, with UN inspectors in the country at the time.

    What right do we have to intervene in other nations civil wars just because we have ‘labeled’ the players? Not one country that has experienced the so called Arab Spring has a stabilized government and population in place. So are we in these countries to assist, help and protect the population and stablize the governments or are we there PROTECTING Western assets?

    I'd like a clear cut answer before another soldier has to die in the name of 'spreading' democracy. Right now it seems like our own democracy is being challenged in States like TX, NC, WI, OH and VA.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • chadwickchadwick Posts: 21,157
    frig assests. & you're right, something is not right.

    question. do we know yet who set off the chemical weapons? i do not have a television & you can understand how this limits a bit of my knowledge about world events.
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • VINNY GOOMBAVINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,818
    Yes, chemical weapons WERE used in Syria months ago....remember the chemical 'red line', and the hype saying that if it were crossed, Team America might need to put some boots on the ground? Yeehaw! Back then, it seemed every world leader was calling for Assad's head for the chem attacks. Then the UN did an investigation and found that it was the Western-backed rebels who used them. Then a rebel group got caught red handed with chemicals and arrested in Turkey. (I posted articles about both, they can be found using the search function).
    So are we really to believe that it was Assad this time?

    Another thing....is it another example of American exceptionalism for everyone to be arguing about whether or not the US should 'stay out' of Syria? We all know for a fact that this has been a proxy war from day one - the west has been funding and arming the rebels all along, with their geopolitcal rivals (Russia and Iran) backing Assad. By saying 'stay out', or 'get involved', are people talking only about blue-eyed US soldiers? We are already involved if we're funding and arming the rebels...so is it ok to do that as long as no americans are dying?
    Don't fall into the trap of thinking this would be some humanitarian rescue effort if the US sent troops in. How many times will we fall for the same war justifications? Ugh.
    Whatever happened to 'international peace-keeping forces?'....blue helmets from Arab (and other) countries, instead of just americans and their NATO bitches kickin ass and takin names? :roll:

    :clap:
  • chadwickchadwick Posts: 21,157
    http://youtu.be/To8MVbmyLYA
    check out this chaos
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,138
    Why would Assad use chemical weapons a short distance away from a UN inspection team when he has the upper hand in the civil war?

    :think:
  • Jason P wrote:
    Why would Assad use chemical weapons a short distance away from a UN inspection team when he has the upper hand in the civil war?

    :think:
    would not shock me if the rebels did it in hopes of pinning it on the government.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,138
    Jason P wrote:
    Why would Assad use chemical weapons a short distance away from a UN inspection team when he has the upper hand in the civil war?

    :think:
    would not shock me if the rebels did it in hopes of pinning it on the government.
    A small sacrifice of your own for a bevy of cruise missiles and long-range bombers? I could see that strategy being justified.

    It's at least as plausible as Assad being stupid enough to draw the West into the fray. Possibly more plausible.
  • JimmyVJimmyV Posts: 19,172
    ajedigecko wrote:
    when we begin war with Syria...it does not need to be long. we have the means to make it quick.

    our problem...we do not like quick war.









    kiss of death

    The problem is never the war itself, it is not having a plan for what comes next. So we go in an quickly remove Assad. Great, but then what?

    Chaos.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
Sign In or Register to comment.