Game Changer in Syria?

Godfather.

norm wrote:

So we’re gonna bomb Syria and kill innocent Syrians because Syria killed innocent Syrians.

....and obama seems to have al quedas back......just my thought on it anyway.

Godfather.

Guitar92player

peacefrompaul wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

norm wrote:

So we’re gonna bomb Syria and kill innocent Syrians because Syria killed innocent Syrians.

The plan is to bomb buildings to show our force, not bomb people.

What are typically in and around buildings?

People will die.

The plan is to bomb empty ones to show our force, or at least that is what I heard, and it was what I initially meant.

There are some Syrian cities that are abandoned, or at least we assume are abandoned.

Guitar92player

Godfather. wrote:

norm wrote:

So we’re gonna bomb Syria and kill innocent Syrians because Syria killed innocent Syrians.

....and obama seems to have al quedas back......just my thought on it anyway.

Godfather.

I know you are trying to point out your hatred for Obama, but Obama said he wants no troops on the ground to aid the rebels. He wants to aid the poor, innocent Syrian citizens.

Get your facts straight.

It's McCain who wants to help the rebels, which saddens me because I like McCain but that is a dumb idea.

Godfather.

Guitar92player wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

norm wrote:

So we’re gonna bomb Syria and kill innocent Syrians because Syria killed innocent Syrians.

....and obama seems to have al quedas back......just my thought on it anyway.

Godfather.

I know you are trying to point out your hatred for Obama, but Obama said he wants no troops on the ground to aid the rebels. He wants to aid the poor, innocent Syrian citizens.

Get your facts straight.

It's McCain who wants to help the rebels, which saddens me because I like McCain but that is a dumb idea.

well my friend when you have the STRAIGHT FACTS let us all know cuse after these last 5 or so years I find it hard to believe anything obama says or for that matter any polition and why the word "hate" ? I said from the start this guy was trouble and if you don't like him it's a political difference if I don't like him it's "hate"....have you thought that maybe my "political difference" was spot on right from the start.....don't hate me because I'm right

Godfather.

peacefrompaul

Guitar92player wrote:

The plan is to bomb empty ones to show our force, or at least that is what I heard, and it was what I initially meant.

There are some Syrian cities that are abandoned, or at least we assume are abandoned.

Oh, alright.

That's our plan?

Sounds absolutely fucking stupid

Guitar92player

peacefrompaul wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

The plan is to bomb empty ones to show our force, or at least that is what I heard, and it was what I initially meant.

There are some Syrian cities that are abandoned, or at least we assume are abandoned.

Oh, alright.

That's our plan?

Sounds absolutely fucking stupid

i agree

Guitar92player

Godfather. wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

I know you are trying to point out your hatred for Obama, but Obama said he wants no troops on the ground to aid the rebels. He wants to aid the poor, innocent Syrian citizens.

Get your facts straight.

It's McCain who wants to help the rebels, which saddens me because I like McCain but that is a dumb idea.

well my friend when you have the STRAIGHT FACTS let us all know cuse after these last 5 or so years I find it hard to believe anything obama says or for that matter any polition and why the word "hate" ? I said from the start this guy was trouble and if you don't like him it's a political difference if I don't like him it's "hate"....have you thought that maybe my "political difference" was spot on right from the start.....don't hate me because I'm right

Godfather.

What were you right about? About him being a bad President, or in your words he was "trouble"? Many think he is a good President, including me. It's your opinion if he is bad. You are not right. People's opinion on how the President is doing is pure opinion. Many think Bush was terrible but I would disagree. I thought he was good too. It's all just opinion.

All Presidents have hard times to go through. No Presidency is perfect.

petejm043

I think we are following the old saying "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." One of Syria's biggest supporters happens to be Iran. So in turn we will be fighting a proxy war with Iran by bombing Syria. In this case our "friend" will be none other than Al-Queda who supports the Syrian rebels.

Godfather.

Guitar92player wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

I know you are trying to point out your hatred for Obama, but Obama said he wants no troops on the ground to aid the rebels. He wants to aid the poor, innocent Syrian citizens.

Get your facts straight.

It's McCain who wants to help the rebels, which saddens me because I like McCain but that is a dumb idea.

well my friend when you have the STRAIGHT FACTS let us all know cuse after these last 5 or so years I find it hard to believe anything obama says or for that matter any polition and why the word "hate" ? I said from the start this guy was trouble and if you don't like him it's a political difference if I don't like him it's "hate"....have you thought that maybe my "political difference" was spot on right from the start.....don't hate me because I'm right

Godfather.

What were you right about? About him being a bad President, or in your words he was "trouble"? Many think he is a good President, including me. It's your opinion if he is bad. You are not right. People's opinion on how the President is doing is pure opinion. Many think Bush was terrible but I would disagree. I thought he was good too. It's all just opinion.

All Presidents have hard times to go through. No Presidency is perfect.

yes you nailed it "All Presidents have hard times to go through. No Presidency is perfect"
maybe the older I get the less I trust our government amd honestly at this point I can't even think of a president I would trust,hopefully in the coming years things will get better.

Godfather.

Godfather.

"The president has left sequestration in place. We have planes being grounded, pilots not receiving training, equipment not being maintained, and yet he wants to go and spend money with the attack against Syria," said Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

According to a report in The Washington Free Beacon, the administration would have to seek additional funding from Congress to pay for attacks on Syria. This would make it all the more imperative for President Obama that Congress authorize the strikes in the first place, and all the more difficult for Obama to proceed if Congress doesn't.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09 ... z2dqQtOSj7


Godfather.

Losiento

This is my view on Syria. It's a CIA paradox. It just goes to show you how Masters of War play both sides. We are helping Al Queida here and fighting them there. Doesn't make sense does it. Just goes to show people that THEY want you to pick a side when technically there isn't any because they play both. So I suggest humanitarian aid and UN Inspectors.

Cosmo

President Obama's move to have Congress authorize use of force is brilliant. It is what Congress is SUPPOSED TO DO. They are the ones empowered to authorize war... it's in the Constitution. Make the proponent's of war actions in Syria (Lindsey Graham and John McCain and their FOX New mouth pieces) put their words into actions.
We should have learned from the debacle in Iraq that turning the War Powers to the Executive Branch is giving too much power to one branch of government.
Make Congress do what their job description calls on them to do.
...
Now... get to work... you useless old pieces of shit!

Jason P

The major players in Congress (Reid, Cantor, Boehner, Pelosi) are all in support ... probably indicates that enogh chickapees will follow suit. Time to get our war on.

I wonder if they will show us the footage of tomahawk missiles going through open windows and the sort?

even flow - question mark

Maybe the Bin-mans plan is getting ramped up even after his death. Not only is the west seemingly going to get sucked into another mess, but we are arming the Bin-mans legions. Nice!

Jason P

Who would have thought ten years ago that the only ones backing a US strike in the middle east would be the French and the Arab Nations?

even flow - question mark

Jason P wrote:

Who would have thought ten years ago that the only ones backing a US strike in the middle east would be the French and the Arab Nations?

At least Powell didn't pull out his lego blocks, dinky cars and fuzzy pictures, showing the world where the "WMD's" were this time around.

mickeyrat

Jason P wrote:

The major players in Congress (Reid, Cantor, Boehner, Pelosi) are all in support ... probably indicates that enogh chickapees will follow suit. Time to get our war on.

I wonder if they will show us the footage of tomahawk missiles going through open windows and the sort?

I'm sick of "will we wont we" rhetoric on the news and everywhere.

CALL ALL THOSE FUCKERS BACK FROM VACATION NOW AND DEBATE IT.

puremagic

Are the people of the America being deceived? LONDON 11

John Kerry’s reference to the London 11. Who is the London 11. For all of that, out of 121 Member States, only 11 will take part in the meeting (Germany, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, United States, France, Italy, Jordan, Qatar, United Kingdom and Turkey). The other 110 members will keep a safe distance.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article179056.html

This is took place in 2012, July 6. There were 121 States attending the Paris summit of the Friends of Syria. It was July 6, 2012. There was talk of an imminent collapse of Syria and its wealth was already being divided up.

The "Friends of Syria" are scheduled to meet on 22 June 2013 in Doha (Qatar). Discussions will focus on arms shipments to the "Free Syrian Army," in the presence of its "chief of staff" General Salim Idriss.

The 11 participants, to whom General Salim Idriss already submitted his list of grievances on 14 June, regard him as an eminent interlocutor. However, despite his title, there is no such thing as an "FSA joint chiefs of staff," but merely a coordination by NATO of groups fighting under this label.

For all of that, out of 121 Member States, only 11 will take part in the meeting (Germany, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, United States, France, Italy, Jordan, Qatar, United Kingdom and Turkey). The other 110 members will keep a safe distance.

Indeed, during the G8 summit in Lough Erne, President Vladimir V. Putin recalled that the delivery of weapons to armed groups in Syria constitutes a violation of international law and exposes the guilty parties to prosecution in international court

Cosmo

The bottom line... nothing will change.
We will hit airfields and command and control centers... fixed artillery batterys... but, that's it. No effect because Syrian jets have already fled to Iran... command an contol have dispersed... fixed artillery batterys are not being used in this conflict (the rebels are not flying jets against the military).
Chemical weapons are being delivered by mobile artillery and difficult to locate. We can't tell which batterys are firing conventional and which are firing chemical shells.
Also... we are we... The United States... to talk about collateral damage? We should ask Afghanistan and Iraq if they are okay with the collateral damage caused by our 2,000 lb conventional munitions dropped on a house that had 2 'insurgents' in it. we didn't 'mean' to kill those civillians... they were just acceptable collateral damage that is justified because we were 'aiming at the bad guys'... weren't they?

Last-12-Exit

Our president just threw the citizens of his own country, congress, and the nations of the world under the bus by saying this decision to act against Syria is our responsibility, not his.
Plus, he said he doesn't need congressional approval. He legally didn't have to get permission to start a war.

If he starts lobbing cruise missles without congressional authorization, I say impeach. He is out of control.