mania Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Prez Obama will make a missile bombardment short, hard-hitting, effective and get out quickly and cleanly. Wasting a lot of money, creating a lot of ill will and acomplishing pretty much nothing of any consequence. Not to mention too many assume zero backlash in that situation None know for sure what defenses could be or retaliation on neighbors. It is just a unguessable This is seeming more & more like a possible Jimmy Carter failed mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Tamson Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Round and round and round we go Why are none of the experts here answering the basic question of Why are we not letting the Arab nations sort this out themselves? We are surely in no doubt as to what all the Arab nations really think of the West, are we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post cloudhopper Posted August 31, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted August 31, 2013 What moral authority has granted President Obama, or for that matter any of the American people being polled, the right to be judge, jury and executioner for crimes committed in another country anyway? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 What moral authority has granted President Obama, or for that matter any of the American people being polled, the right to be judge, jury and executioner for crimes committed in another country anyway? I find that question incredibly naive and silly considering the involvement of Iran and Russian with the Syrian government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 What moral authority has granted President Obama, or for that matter any of the American people being polled, the right to be judge, jury and executioner for crimes committed in another country anyway? Er, none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exsexyman Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 @ old git. I apologise to you, i appear to have misinterpreted your point regarding the EU siding with Syria. I am sorry. Don't get me wrong, i am no supporter of Assad, far from it, he is clearly a tyrant. But Syria was stable, it was secular, people were free to practice their religion of choice, women were not discriminated against, did not have to wear the burkha. Girl students had the same educational rights as boy students. How long does anybody think that will last if the West get their way and overthrow Assad? There are two beautiful Christian cathedrals in Damascus and several churches, how long will they be standing if the rebel Islamist extremists get their way? They are already destroying churches and slaughtering and driving out Christians in other parts of Syria as soon as they gain a foothold. They are even destroying mosques where the worshippers don't conform to their own narrow extremist dogma. It is a sad fact of life that most Middle East countries cannot be compared in any way to the 'democracies' of the West, it is a totally foreign concept to them. There are too many different factions, each faction listening only to their religious leaders. The idea that the West can bomb democracy into them is the stuff of fantasy and will always be doomed to failure. The only thing that keeps them reasonably stable is an Iron Fist. Sad but true. For proof, if any is needed just look at Iraq now, and Libya. suicide bombings on a daily basis in Iraq by Al Qaeda, fifty killed yesterday alone. Al Qaeda had no presence in Iraq before the West's foolhardy intervention, none at all. Saddam Hussain, tyrant that he was was their sworn enemy and vice versa. How ironic that the West are now prepared to turn a blind eye to their atrocities in Syria despite 9-11, 7-7 etc, and use them for their own goals. And the rank hypocrisy and hand wringing regarding the use of 'Chemical weapons'. In Fallujah, which was bombarded with white phosphorus and uranium tipped shells, (acceptable weapons apparently), killing hundreds of civilians. Now there is what is described as a staggering rise in birth defects, latest studies show that more than half of all babies surveyed were being born with birth defects between 2007 and 2010. Incidences of childhood cancer among children increased tenfold. And this will carry on for generations. Depleted uranium, the American gift that keeps on giving! Now of course, those responsible have upped sticks and moved on to Syria, via Libya, leaving the poor sods to it. Surely the obvious question that should be asked about the present crisis in Syria is, when the West have their regime change, because that is really the purpose here, what will take it's place? This question is always studiously ignored because i suspect, deep down, everyone knows the answer, and the answer is too unpalatable to admit to. A picture of a Christian wedding in a beautiful cathedral in Damascus. Enjoy it while you still can. http://www.360cities.net/image/syria-damascus-cathedral?utm_medium=all_images&utm_source=google_earth#48.80,1.00,110.0 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F430murci Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I agree with the let them sort it out and not our problem posture, but then I see articles like below and videos of suffering children and I am suckered in. I think the no proof Assad launched chemical weapons is a chicken <deleted> ignoring reality argument. EVERYONE in CIA and military intelligence that I am seeing interviewed including those against strikes and Bama are saying he did it and apparently has been lobbing chemical weapons for quiet some time on a small scale in battlfields on out skirts of populated areas making it difficult if not impossible to investigate. In the moral issue . . . That is like saying what moral obligation or responsibility does any human have to help any other human in a time of need and what good are weapons bans and designation of acts if war crimes if there is no enforcement. --------- The doctor, from the charity Hand in Hand for Syria, is known as Dr Rola. She treated victims of a suspected napalm attack on a school in northern Syria earlier this week. Dr Rola told the BBC's Newsnight she would invite Mr Miliband and his family to spend time in Syria to experience the horrors suffered by its people. . . . Dr Rola said: "I'd like him to spend a day in one of the civilian areas under constant shelling, watching the warplanes above us throw all sorts of weapons on to civilians, and fear for the safety of his family. "Spend just one day and one night in a tent in one of the camps where the homeless now live and drink sewage water, and try his luck with typhoid fever and no medication." http://mobile.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23909554 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudhopper Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 What moral authority has granted President Obama, or for that matter any of the American people being polled, the right to be judge, jury and executioner for crimes committed in another country anyway? I find that question incredibly naive and silly considering the involvement of Iran and Russian with the Syrian government. It quite possibly is. So please enlighten me then how the involvement of Russia and Iran in Syria gives the US the right to bomb Syria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Tamson Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I agree with the let them sort it out and not our problem posture, but then I see articles like below and videos of suffering children and I am suckered in. I think the no proof Assad launched chemical weapons is a chicken <deleted> ignoring reality argument. EVERYONE in CIA and military intelligence that I am seeing interviewed including those against strikes and Bama are saying he did it and apparently has been lobbing chemical weapons for quiet some time on a small scale in battlfields on out skirts of populated areas making it difficult if not impossible to investigate. In the moral issue . . . That is like saying what moral obligation or responsibility does any human have to help any other human in a time of need and what good are weapons bans and designation of acts if war crimes if there is no enforcement. --------- The doctor, from the charity Hand in Hand for Syria, is known as Dr Rola. She treated victims of a suspected napalm attack on a school in northern Syria earlier this week. Dr Rola told the BBC's Newsnight she would invite Mr Miliband and his family to spend time in Syria to experience the horrors suffered by its people. . . . Dr Rola said: "I'd like him to spend a day in one of the civilian areas under constant shelling, watching the warplanes above us throw all sorts of weapons on to civilians, and fear for the safety of his family. "Spend just one day and one night in a tent in one of the camps where the homeless now live and drink sewage water, and try his luck with typhoid fever and no medication." http://mobile.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23909554 You are so right - BUT how many other parts of the world can you say almost the same thing about? AND why should it be [only] us that has a moral conscience? Look how the rich the lifestyles are for a great majority of those Arabs living in Saudi and the Emirate states are! Or even the rich in Lybia itself? Dr Rola is an Angel, but why is she singling out Milaband as the devil here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 What moral authority has granted President Obama, or for that matter any of the American people being polled, the right to be judge, jury and executioner for crimes committed in another country anyway? I find that question incredibly naive and silly considering the involvement of Iran and Russian with the Syrian government. It quite possibly is. So please enlighten me then how the involvement of Russia and Iran in Syria gives the US the right to bomb Syria. What right does the Syrian government have to use chemical weapons on innocent civilians? It would be nice if the US could build a robust coalition and get U.N. approval but considering the sure thing vetoes of both China and RUSSIA (see above) that just can't happen. Morality is relative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mania Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 What right does the Syrian government have to use chemical weapons on innocent civilians? Didn't see anyone claim it was their right, anymore than the right to use Napalm, Agent Orange, White Phos or Nuclear Bombs I believe the question was What moral authority has granted President Obama, or for that matter any of the American people being polled, the right to be judge, jury and executioner for crimes committed in another country anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudhopper Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 What moral authority has granted President Obama, or for that matter any of the American people being polled, the right to be judge, jury and executioner for crimes committed in another country anyway? I find that question incredibly naive and silly considering the involvement of Iran and Russian with the Syrian government. It quite possibly is. So please enlighten me then how the involvement of Russia and Iran in Syria gives the US the right to bomb Syria. What right does the Syrian government have to use chemical weapons on innocent civilians? It would be nice if the US could build a robust coalition and get U.N. approval but considering the sure thing vetoes of both China and RUSSIA (see above) that just can't happen. Morality is relative. Syria has no right to use chemical weapons on innocent civilians, if that's what happened, in my personal opinion. It might be nice, or it might not be, if the US got approval from the UN or a robust coalition for our war mongering but we have in fact received neither. So I ask again - what involvement of Russia and Iran in Syria give the US a moral right to bomb Syria? Do you mean that the US concept of morality and its enforcement is superior relative to most of the rest of the world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F430murci Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 His family and friends in Syria say they are ready by any means for an end to what he calls an assault on the country. On a daily basis, people in a large number of cities in Syria go to bed with a fear of having basically the Air Force bomb their homes at night, or a Scud missile being launched from somewhere, Tabbara said. His hope is that a U.S. missile attack will stop the Assad government from using Air Force or domestic missiles to terrorize the Syrian population. But response should have come much sooner, Tabbara says. Up until Monday, the last 2 1/2 years, Assad had yet to receive one serious signal from the free world, Tabbara said. What hes doing is tolerated, and as such he has been given a defacto green light despite all the red lines he had crossed. He had a green light to terrorize, brutalize and attempt to quell a national uprising. After two years of bloodshed, Tabbara says his Syrian family and friends are not worried about the aftermath of a U.S.-led military strike: How much more can you worry when you have literally a madman that is not shy to strike using any kind of weapon . . . attacking any time of day, at the most random locations? Tabbara said. http://www.suntimes.com/22211367-418/chicagoan-heads-to-syria-i-want-to-be-there-for-this-crucial-moment.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F430murci Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Various opinions of Syrians about what US should or should not do. http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-77226409/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mania Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) Thank you for sharing Russian STATE propaganda. Russia is of course totally dedicated to keeping Assad in power ... no matter what. I thought it was a refreshing change from the Obama-bots propaganda Russia is no more dedicated than the US Obama is dedicated to taking a chance having the Rebels in Power The difference being the International laws cited favor Russia's stance If the US sponsors of the Rebels whether that be thru the CIA providing weaponry etc want to continue their under the table support of the rebels that is their prerogative But the US should no more go in & fight the rebels battle for them than Russia go in & help Assad by bombing the rebels Wonder how the Obama spin machine would take that? Edited August 31, 2013 by mania Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dancealot Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) I will quote Russian Vice-Premier Dmitry Rogozin. He put it this way: The US is like a monkey holding hand grenade. Here's the transliteration proof. http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/08/russian-vice-premier-obamas-mideast-policy-like-monkey-with-a-hand-grenade/ Edited August 31, 2013 by Dancealot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Nobody is talking about boots on the ground. At this point it's about a response to the chemical weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) I will quote Russian Vice-Premier Dmitry Rogozin. He put it this way: The US is like a monkey holding hand grenade. Here's the transliteration proof. http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/08/russian-vice-premier-obamas-mideast-policy-like-monkey-with-a-hand-grenade/ The Russians talk big, don't they? The cold war seems to be back. Edited August 31, 2013 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dancealot Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) Nobody is talking about boots on the ground. At this point it's about a response to the chemical weapons. Give me a break, JT. This whole situation feels very familiar.. Russia countering the US on foreign territory.. Edited August 31, 2013 by Dancealot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mania Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) Nobody is talking about boots on the ground. At this point it's about a response to the chemical weapons. If instead Russia said they know 100% it was the rebels who discharged the gas & positioned destroyers off the coast claiming they were going to do a short quick strike on the rebels to teach them a lesson what would Obama say? Probably exactly what Russia is saying now...Show the Proof & Obey the International Laws Edited August 31, 2013 by mania Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) Nobody is talking about boots on the ground. At this point it's about a response to the chemical weapons. If instead Russia said they know 100% it was the rebels who discharged the gas & positioned destroyers off the coast claiming they were going to do a short quick strike on the rebels to teach them a lesson what would Obama say? Probably exactly what Russia is saying now...Proof & law Not interested in your hypotheticals. I happen to believe Kerry about this. I didn't believe Bush about Iraq. If the USA does nothing, what does Iran do next knowing the USA is too weak now to respond to ANYTHING? You're looking for perfect morality. Doesn't exist. Edited August 31, 2013 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mania Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) Not interested in your hypotheticals. You're looking for perfect morality. Doesn't exist. Actually I am looking for honesty & a little morality would not hurt. My example is no more hypothetical than the one Obama & co are asking the world to swallow as they have put forth no proof. Neither would any proof give them license to act outside international laws regarding this event It is a slippery slope your cheer leading is taking you down Edited August 31, 2013 by mania Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dancealot Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 The Russians talk big, don't they?The cold war seems to be back. Perhaps but more likely(to me) this nasty Syria situation is being abused as a pre-emptive strike to glorify engagement into a new war. Yemen and Iran are very close.. Russian involvement would be desirable.. Just speculating... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F430murci Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) I will quote Russian Vice-Premier Dmitry Rogozin. He put it this way: The US is like a monkey holding hand grenade. Here's the transliteration proof. http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/08/russian-vice-premier-obamas-mideast-policy-like-monkey-with-a-hand-grenade/ Your translation is a bit off according to my wife. What he said is: "West is treating Islamic world like a monkey with a grenade." The true meaning is US is not careful or acts irrationally in mid eastern affairs. Russian can be a bit difficult to translate accurately using Google. Edited August 31, 2013 by F430murci Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dancealot Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) Your translation is a bit off according to my wife. A rough translation of what he said is:"West is treating Islamic world like a monkey with a grenade." The true meaning is US is not careful or acts irrationally in mid eastern affairs. Thanks for the rectification, F430murci. So there's some diplomacy in that quote after all. Edited August 31, 2013 by Dancealot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 As Kerry pointed out, there also a slippery slope for the U.S. to do NOTHING. Which is worse? People can disagree. I think nothing is worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F430murci Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Your translation is a bit off according to my wife. A rough translation of what he said is: "West is treating Islamic world like a monkey with a grenade." The true meaning is US is not careful or acts irrationally in mid eastern affairs. Thanks for the rectification, F430murci. So there's some diplomacy in that quote after all. Haha, I cited this quote yesterday so I was also impressed with it. Just easy to take this as a somewhat racist personal slam toward a black president Not sure it was meant that way. Could have been though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post NeverSure Posted August 31, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) Nobody is talking about boots on the ground. At this point it's about a response to the chemical weapons. If instead Russia said they know 100% it was the rebels who discharged the gas & positioned destroyers off the coast claiming they were going to do a short quick strike on the rebels to teach them a lesson what would Obama say? Probably exactly what Russia is saying now...Show the Proof & Obey the International Laws With all due respect, I'm really tired of hearing about "international laws." There is no international body that can tell the US or any other country what to do. Do you really think that the US or any other Western country would release its sovereignty to some higher international power? <deleted> do we have, a one-world government run by some unseen forces that now controls sovereign nations? No resolution or "law" framed by the UN is binding on any of its members. So where are we getting these "laws?" While I'm 100% against an attack on Syria and would instead want to see them fight their own war, I don't give one inch of the sovereignty of the US or Great Britain or any other nation to anybody. Edited August 31, 2013 by NeverSure 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dancealot Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Syria is not Vietnam. Syria is not Iraq. Syria is Syria. Syria is just another excuse (Gulf of Tonkin). Syria is Iraq. Syria is the money mule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F430murci Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Your translation is a bit off according to my wife. A rough translation of what he said is: "West is treating Islamic world like a monkey with a grenade." The true meaning is US is not careful or acts irrationally in mid eastern affairs. Thanks for the rectification, F430murci. So there's some diplomacy in that quote after all. Haha, I will say when I asked wife to translate she was like why the hell is US getting involved over there. They are not a threat to US and Bama does not have courage to do anything over there. View of a Russian women . . . She did change tune about when I told her about school yard being napalmed and kids dying from chemical weapons. She then someone should do something, but Bama won't. I seriously gotta back away from watching the children and innocence suffering. I guess my soft spot for children and women takes over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts