Over 90,000 killed in Syrian crisis - UN

[pastafarian]

Let's please stay on topic of politics. Religion should not be the primary focus of the thread.

Unfortunately the two go hand in hand regarding most of the world's current problems, especially in Syria!

Interesting article here, worrying if there's any truth to it

http://www.eutimes.net/2013/08/putin-orders-massive-strike-against-saudi-arabia-if-west-attacks-syria/

[Scott]

Let's please stay on topic of politics. Religion should not be the primary focus of the thread.

Unfortunately the two go hand in hand regarding most of the world's current problems, especially in Syria!

Interesting article here, worrying if there's any truth to it

http://www.eutimes.net/2013/08/putin-orders-massive-strike-against-saudi-arabia-if-west-attacks-syria/

The operative part of your post is 'the two go hand in hand', so keep your comments balanced.

An off-topic anti- American rant has also been deleted. I believe this effort involves others beside the US, and the thread is not going to focus solely on US involvement in Syria.

[simple1]

Let's please stay on topic of politics. Religion should not be the primary focus of the thread.

Unfortunately the two go hand in hand regarding most of the world's current problems, especially in Syria!

Interesting article here, worrying if there's any truth to it

http://www.eutimes.net/2013/08/putin-orders-massive-strike-against-saudi-arabia-if-west-attacks-syria/

You would have to be seriously deluded if you believe the content in the article

[jpinx]

Let's please stay on topic of politics. Religion should not be the primary focus of the thread.

Unfortunately the two go hand in hand regarding most of the world's current problems, especially in Syria!

Interesting article here, worrying if there's any truth to it

http://www.eutimes.net/2013/08/putin-orders-massive-strike-against-saudi-arabia-if-west-attacks-syria/

The operative part of your post is 'the two go hand in hand', so keep your comments balanced.

An off-topic anti- American rant has also been deleted. I believe this effort involves others beside the US, and the thread is not going to focus solely on US involvement in Syria.

Whilst I totally agree that ranting is inappropriate, I believe that apart from USA, only France has actually said they are in any way ready to do something on the ground in Syria. UK has recalled parliament, but cannot say more until parliament gives a vote. As far as I can tell, USA's constitution permits the president much more authority than the heads of other countries.

There's also this consideration....

Asia markets fall on Syria concerns

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23860109#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa

and ...

US to reach debt ceiling in October

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23845905#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa

Can USA actually afford another embroilment of this nature. Certainly it's not going to go down well in the world's financial markets.

Edited August 28, 2013 by jpinx

[midas]

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation”

Sen. Barack Obama

Dec. 20, 2007

[jpinx]

There appears to be clear indications that the supposed chemical attack and the subsequent sniper attack on UN inspectors has been orchestrated by the rebels. There are so many factions in the opposition that no-one really knows who's doing what and it's easy for the somebody in the opposition to say "It wasn't us." when he is only talking about one of the many groups in opposition. Now we have leading politicians jumping to conclusions and spouting hell-fire and brimstone before the UN has even reported their findings. All this gives great credence to the belief that military action has been locked and loaded for some time now and all that was missing was the excuse..

OK - now let's take a look at these politicians situations. Who's not doing well in other areas? Who's up for re-election in the next year?

[Scott]

A comment about moderation has been deleted. You can post anything that is on-topic. You may not make remarks that break the rules. One post deleted breaks this rule:

7) Not to post slurs or degrading comments directed towards any group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

Rules # 5 and # 21 have also been broken.

[canman]

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation”

Sen. Barack Obama

Dec. 20, 2007

Carney has already laid the ground work to get around that little jem. He said this morning that letting a regime get away with CW attacks does represent a threat to the nation.

Not the exact quote but its clear what he was doing.

My bet is they take out airbases / planes and C&C centres with cruise missles but that will be about it.

Edited August 28, 2013 by canman

[simple1]

Who said they want a democracy?

They dont understand the meaning of the word, so its a moot point.

When you say "they" I guess you are referring to dictators & Islamic extremists. The Arab Spring was a step towards the concept of democracy, but so far all attempts have been crushed by dictators and Islamic convervatives. However, your comment is misleading as their was & still is active debate in the Muslim world on the form of democracy that may be acheivable.

The Egyptian Commander in Chief, who ousted Morsi, has outlined his thoughts on the implemenation of democratic principles, with an Islamic flavour.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/egypt-islam-alsisi/2013/08/27/id/522409

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_democracy#Islamic_democracy_in_practice

Edited August 28, 2013 by simple1

[Scott]

An off-topic post and reply have been deleted.

[JDGRUEN]

Does Obama know he’s fighting on al-Qa’ida’s side?

‘All for one and one for all’ should be the battle cry if the West goes to war against Assad’s Syrian regime

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/does-obama-know-hes-fighting-on-alqaidas-side-8786680.html

[mania]

Does Obama know he’s fighting on al-Qa’ida’s side?

‘All for one and one for all’ should be the battle cry if the West goes to war against Assad’s Syrian regime

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/does-obama-know-hes-fighting-on-alqaidas-side-8786680.html

Interesting & from that article

Sure, we are told that it will be a short strike on Syria, in and out, a couple of days. That’s what Obama likes to think. But think Iran. Think Hezbollah. I rather suspect – if Obama does go ahead – that this one will run and run.

I also think it has the ability to run & run & that they know that too going in.

I also think the Iran tie is something they & their friend? actually hope for.

But Syria is not Libya

If Obama thinks 2 days will do it one has to wonder if he really believes that.

Libya is like a small backwater deal compared to Syria

Does the US think it will just lob cruise missiles in for two days & call it a done?

Are they sure no S300's are on site? How about Russian P-800 supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles?

If they have either it may not be a one way launch fest like Libya

Does Syria have anti-aircraft systems, submarines & anti-ship missile systems along the coast.

Can they all be taken out before a few launches in self defense against an unprovoked attack take place?

What happens if the US loses a ship? Couldn't happen?

If it does was it an act of war or self defense by Syria? It would appear self defense to normal folks in much of the world

& definitely more so in that part of the world.

If it gets ugly & escalates to boots on the ground how does Syria compare to recent skirmishes?

Does Syria have twice as many armed forces as Iraq? What is the total cost to the USA in possible loss of lives & $$$'s

In either case this is nobody's business except those involved on the ground there now.

US should stand down & the greater majority of Americans have said as much

[Ulysses G.]

If Obama thinks 2 days will do it one has to wonder if he really believes that.

No one believes that. Most likely he is just trying to save face because of his red line remark. The last that I heard that Obama administration was saying that it will last "hours, rather than days". In other words, the strike is not meant to have much effect on the conflict.

[mania]

If Obama thinks 2 days will do it one has to wonder if he really believes that.

No one believes that. Most likely he is just trying to save face because of his red line remark. The last that I heard that Obama administration was saying that it will last "hours, rather than days". In other words, the strike is not meant to have much effect on the conflict.

Understood

Yet Obama should grow up & not make this a matter of saving face.

Obama should not point a gun if not intending to truly use it.

He is responsible for those he sends to do his face saving bidding

It may seem far fetched but if in self defense Syria does take out

a US ship that is firing on their country unprovoked were does it go from there?

[Mosha]

BBC - Russian media is talking about a similar crisis to the Cuban missile crisis.

[Chicog]

A surgical strike to take out chemical weapons and send a message to the Syrians not to use them again is acceptable IMO.

I think even Russia would probably accept that, too. And if they do, China will.

Iran will bleat, but no one gives a stuff what those mad mullahs think anyway.

[mania]

A surgical strike to take out chemical weapons and send a message to the Syrians not to use them again is acceptable IMO.

I think even Russia would probably accept that, too. And if they do, China will.

Iran will bleat, but no one gives a stuff what those mad mullahs think anyway.

I think neither Russia or China will as you say "accept"

Syria crisis: Russia and China step up warning over strike

This one had 1400 comments yesterday & today it approaches 4000 comments

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say

Not too late for Obama to grow up

A child only looks in at what he needs

A man looks out at the needs of others

In Obama's case the No's from America is deafening.

If he does not hear it then he is deaf to his employers

To your surgical strike I just do not understand where this type of thinking comes from

when a country like Syria is involved. Do you really think it will be 100% one sided?

Does any country that size sit still while being assaulted?

Edited August 28, 2013 by mania

[boomerangutang]

What an unholy mess in a god-forsaken desert. Are there even any dung beetles left there? (all other wild animal species have gone) - if there are, perhaps they can roll up the shit, when the last people hobbling around - run out of other people to kill.

Edited August 28, 2013 by boomerangutang

[Chicog]

A surgical strike to take out chemical weapons and send a message to the Syrians not to use them again is acceptable IMO.

I think even Russia would probably accept that, too. And if they do, China will.

Iran will bleat, but no one gives a stuff what those mad mullahs think anyway.

I think neither Russia or China will as you say "accept"

Syria crisis: Russia and China step up warning over strike

This one had 1400 comments yesterday & today it approaches 4000 comments

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say

Not too late for Obama to grow up

A child only looks in at what he needs

A man looks out at the needs of others

In Obama's case the No's from America is deafening.

If he does not hear it then he is deaf to his employers

To your surgical strike I just do not understand where this type of thinking comes from

when a country like Syria is involved. Do you really think it will be 100% one sided?

Does any country that size sit still while being assaulted?

Russia didn't want Kosovo bombed either, and look how that turned out.

As for the strike, I don't get what you mean by "100% one sided".

Unless Syria plans on launching tomahawks against the USA, I don't really see what they can do.

Mind you, with the US's past record, if I was Syrian I wouldn't be planning on going to any wedding parties for the next few days.

[lomatopo]

Please also see:

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Operation Urgent Fury (invasion of Grenada)

Gulf of Tonkin Incident

Remember the Maine

[Exsexyman]

There appears to be clear indications that the supposed chemical attack and the subsequent sniper attack on UN inspectors has been orchestrated by the rebels. There are so many factions in the opposition that no-one really knows who's doing what and it's easy for the somebody in the opposition to say "It wasn't us." when he is only talking about one of the many groups in opposition. Now we have leading politicians jumping to conclusions and spouting hell-fire and brimstone before the UN has even reported their findings. All this gives great credence to the belief that military action has been locked and loaded for some time now and all that was missing was the excuse..

OK - now let's take a look at these politicians situations. Who's not doing well in other areas? Who's up for re-election in the next year?

The UN inspectors findings will be irrelevant i'm afraid, they are forbidden from finding out WHO used chemical weapons, only IF they were used. The Wall Street Journal reports, " The team must be able to conduct a full, thorough and unimpeded investigation" said U.N. Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon on Sunday night. "However, the team is only mandated to determine if chemical weapons were used, not who used them". So if it turns out that the 'Rebels' carried out the attack it will still be used as an excuse to attack the Syrian Government, hence the haste to start bombing. The fix is in, The US and their allies will get the war they have been planning for years.

[midas]

A surgical strike to take out chemical weapons and send a message to the Syrians not to use them again is acceptable IMO.

I think even Russia would probably accept that, too. And if they do, China will.

Iran will bleat, but no one gives a stuff what those mad mullahs think anyway.

I think neither Russia or China will as you say "accept"

Syria crisis: Russia and China step up warning over strike

This one had 1400 comments yesterday & today it approaches 4000 comments

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say

Not too late for Obama to grow up

A child only looks in at what he needs

A man looks out at the needs of others

In Obama's case the No's from America is deafening.

If he does not hear it then he is deaf to his employers

To your surgical strike I just do not understand where this type of thinking comes from

when a country like Syria is involved. Do you really think it will be 100% one sided?

Does any country that size sit still while being assaulted?

" I think neither Russia or China will as you say "accept" "

i am amazed how many people are so confident this can be neatly contained and believe China won't become involved. China will be involved because they worry if they don't do something now they could soon be on USA ‘s list themselves.

Edited August 28, 2013 by midas

[geriatrickid]

There are several issues that will have an impact;

1. Turkey and the Arab Gulf nations want something done and have been quite vocal.

2. If Syria is attacked, there will be a retaliatory attack on Israel, despite the fact that Israel has no problem with Assad staying in power.

3. Hizbollah may very well attempt to start another war with Israel, in hopes of providing an excuse for Iran to intervene.

The US should stay out of this mess. If the arab gulf states and Turkey have concerns, let them launch the air strikes. Russia and China won't react to that.

[Publicus]

A surgical strike to take out chemical weapons and send a message to the Syrians not to use them again is acceptable IMO.

I think even Russia would probably accept that, too. And if they do, China will.

Iran will bleat, but no one gives a stuff what those mad mullahs think anyway.

I think neither Russia or China will as you say "accept"

Syria crisis: Russia and China step up warning over strike

This one had 1400 comments yesterday & today it approaches 4000 comments

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say

Not too late for Obama to grow up

A child only looks in at what he needs

A man looks out at the needs of others

In Obama's case the No's from America is deafening.

If he does not hear it then he is deaf to his employers

To your surgical strike I just do not understand where this type of thinking comes from

when a country like Syria is involved. Do you really think it will be 100% one sided?

Does any country that size sit still while being assaulted?

" I think neither Russia or China will as you say "accept" "

i am amazed how many people are so confident this can be neatly contained and believe China won't become involved. China will be involved because they worry if they don't do something now they could soon be on USA ‘s list themselves.

The USA is on China's list.

First name at the top.

[Chicog]

There are several issues that will have an impact;

1. Turkey and the Arab Gulf nations want something done and have been quite vocal.

Not just the GCC, the Arab League is in favour of the US doing their dirty work as well.

[boomerangutang]

There appears to be clear indications that the supposed chemical attack and the subsequent sniper attack on UN inspectors has been orchestrated by the rebels. There are so many factions in the opposition that no-one really knows who's doing what and it's easy for the somebody in the opposition to say "It wasn't us." when he is only talking about one of the many groups in opposition. Now we have leading politicians jumping to conclusions and spouting hell-fire and brimstone before the UN has even reported their findings. All this gives great credence to the belief that military action has been locked and loaded for some time now and all that was missing was the excuse..

OK - now let's take a look at these politicians situations. Who's not doing well in other areas? Who's up for re-election in the next year? Chicog is closer to the mark: ""

So if it turns out that the 'Rebels' carried out the attack it will still be used as an excuse to attack the Syrian Government, hence the haste to start bombing. The fix is in, The US and their allies will get the war they have been planning for years.

I resent the remark "The US and their allies will get the war they have been planning for years."

The US and NATO aren't stupid and they aren't eager to go to war. Syria's Arab neighbors are pissed off, but they want the US and NATO to do the dirty work that they're not willing/capable of doing. (I can't turn off the bold function). Iran is the exception. Not sure how Iraq sees it all, probably are too busy with their daily bombings and are worried (as are all the other countries bordering Syria, except Israel) about floods of refugees.

[Chicog]

Not sure how Iraq sees it all, probably are too busy with their daily bombings and are worried (as are all the other countries bordering Syria, except Israel) about floods of refugees.

I'm fairly certain they aren't too happy about having a Sunni neighbour, since it's the Sunni in Iraq doing most of the bombing these days.

[Ulysses G.]

I resent the remark "The US and their allies will get the war they have been planning for years."

The US has too many problems of its own to want war and Obama wants to avoid it at all costs. This is all about his unfortunate "red line" remark and saving face.

[F430murci]

I would say it about to go down.

KEVIN Rudd suspended his campaign to attend a national security briefing in Canberra on the unfolding chemical weapons crisis in Syria.

The Prime Minister said in Sydney yesterday he was aware of media reports that the US was readying missile strikes on Syrian government forces, but said Australia would not rush into responding.

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/election-2013/rudd-halts-campaigning-for-national-security-meeting-on-syria/story-fn9qr68y-1226703274257

Other than words, what meaningfull response can be acheived by Australia, just BS by Rudd

Uhm . . . Not about Australia doing anything . . . Just an early indication that US was actually taking serious steps toward action. You were not seeing forest for the trees.

[Exsexyman]

There appears to be clear indications that the supposed chemical attack and the subsequent sniper attack on UN inspectors has been orchestrated by the rebels. There are so many factions in the opposition that no-one really knows who's doing what and it's easy for the somebody in the opposition to say "It wasn't us." when he is only talking about one of the many groups in opposition. Now we have leading politicians jumping to conclusions and spouting hell-fire and brimstone before the UN has even reported their findings. All this gives great credence to the belief that military action has been locked and loaded for some time now and all that was missing was the excuse..

OK - now let's take a look at these politicians situations. Who's not doing well in other areas? Who's up for re-election in the next year? Chicog is closer to the mark: ""

So if it turns out that the 'Rebels' carried out the attack it will still be used as an excuse to attack the Syrian Government, hence the haste to start bombing. The fix is in, The US and their allies will get the war they have been planning for years.

I resent the remark "The US and their allies will get the war they have been planning for years."

The US and NATO aren't stupid and they aren't eager to go to war. Syria's Arab neighbors are pissed off, but they want the US and NATO to do the dirty work that they're not willing/capable of doing. (I can't turn off the bold function). Iran is the exception. Not sure how Iraq sees it all, probably are too busy with their daily bombings and are worried (as are all the other countries bordering Syria, except Israel) about floods of refugees.

Oh i don't think The US and NATO are stupid, far from it, just as i don't think Assad is stupid, as he would have to be if he launched chemical weapons when he is winning the war against the insurgents, on the day UN inspectors arrived, knowing that the result of that would give the green light for the US and their allies to attack him. He is not mad!

There is plenty of evidence that the US and their allies have been covertly fermenting opposition in Syria for years, spending millions of dollars in the process, using all sorts of methods, and allying themselves with people who in any other circumstances are the West's natural enemies. The culmination of this is where we find ourselves today. Some interesting reading here about some of the main players in the destabilization of Syria, and their objectives. Plus of course 4 star general, Wesley Clarke, who despite his high rank and experience, ( He was the supreme commander in Kosovo in 1999), some on here dismiss as some kind of conspiracy nutcase! I don't think so.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/12/syrian-opposition-doing-the-talking

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-secretly-backed-syrian-opposition-groups-cables-released-by-wikileaks-show/2011/04/14/AF1p9hwD_story.html