BREAKING: United States attacks Syria

[elvis]

i dont really think it does
unless you want to risk an untested person in command

he is untested whether this story is true or not.

 

[DiveCon]

he is untested whether this story is true or not.

i know
thats why i dont think it effects the election at all

 

[DavidS]

and just who is "US Official"??


an unnamed source

Do you read the news? Almost all of the news has unnamed sources and sources that disclose information in exchange for annonimity. I don't see you on here picking apart every single news story that has that. If the AP has confirmed this with the US military, it's true.

 

[DiveCon]

Do you read the news? Almost all of the news has unnamed sources and sources that disclose information in exchange for annonimity. I don't see you on here picking apart every single news story that has that. If the AP has confirmed this with the US military, it's true.

it might be
but i dont trust the AP to not make stuff up
they have been caught doing so before
now, when we have a named source, that will be different

 

[elvis]

Do you read the news? Almost all of the news has unnamed sources and sources that disclose information in exchange for annonimity. I don't see you on here picking apart every single news story that has that. If the AP has confirmed this with the US military, it's true.

so how does it affect the election?

 

[editec]

While I do not doubt that the US forces were going after real terrorists, this was, a bad move diplomatically.

We need allies in the Mid east, folks. Not governments which have to condemn us when our forces accidently kill their citizens.

 

[rayboyusmc]

I know you like to believe your country is always wrong,

Wow, and you are the true patriot. Your partisan patriotism is getting overused, my Dear.

 

[strollingbones]

I don't like Drudge, but he doesn't post bogus stories. This is also being posted through the AP and Reuters and just crossed FoxNews and MSNBC both.

The story so far is that American soldiers landed in Syria from helicopters. If that's true, that is an official invasion of Syrian territory.

dridge doesnt post bogus stories and fox is fair and balanced....

 

[WillowTree]

Wow, and you are the true patriot. Your partisan patriotism is getting overused, my Dear.[/QUOT

 

[strollingbones]

okay okay this is where being a liberal gets kinda touchie with me...

let me remind your asses of 9/12/01 when all of you...liberals cons etc..were calling for blood...i remember asking my lib friends who were calling for blood....the war cries going up....what about 3 years down the road...will you have the stomach for the prolonged war this will take? they looked at me like i was crazy...it will be over in months...again i ask about war 3 yrs down the road and no one would consider the concept. now we have the reality of the concept...we have two wars going...we have debated torture as a nation...gitmo etc...were they war crimes a big shock? did you really expect a clean and quick war? if so, then who is the fool there? are people so much a product of video games etc that they failed to realize what we committed too? we have lost too many men/women to this war but what does one do at this point? you cannot simply leave....and iraq must begin to step up...more than they are now...afghanistain has been all but forgotten...we still have men/women dying there. Somewhere in between mccains being there, a hundred years if necessary and obama's getting the hell out period , there must be a compromise. As for syria and pakistain, if that is where the terrorists are hiding then we go in and strike. If the attacks save one us military or any of our allieds from being killed...so be it. pagans neither desire war nor shy from it, it is a costly and replusive manner to deal with conflict but at times necessary.

 

[editec]

okay okay this is where being a liberal gets kinda touchie with me...

let me remind your asses of 9/12/01 when all of you...liberals cons etc..were calling for blood...i remember asking my lib friends who were calling for blood....the war cries going up....what about 3 years down the road...will you have the stomach for the prolonged war this will take? they looked at me like i was crazy...it will be over in months...again i ask about war 3 yrs down the road and no one would consider the concept. now we have the reality of the concept...we have two wars going...we have debated torture as a nation...gitmo etc...were they war crimes a big shock? did you really expect a clean and quick war? if so, then who is the fool there? are people so much a product of video games etc that they failed to realize what we committed too? we have lost too many men/women to this war but what does one do at this point? you cannot simply leave....and iraq must begin to step up...more than they are now...afghanistain has been all but forgotten...we still have men/women dying there. Somewhere in between mccains being there, a hundred years if necessary and obama's getting the hell out period , there must be a compromise. As for syria and pakistain, if that is where the terrorists are hiding then we go in and strike. If the attacks save one us military or any of our allieds from being killed...so be it. pagans neither desire war nor shy from it, it is a costly and replusive manner to deal with conflict but at times necessary.

I don't know who your "liberal" friends were but they sound pretty stupid to me.

No liberal I knew was calling for the blood of Iraqis.

 

[Mr. President]

This is something we should have been doing a long time ago.

 

[Gurdari]

DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) - Syria's state-run television and witnesses say U.S. military helicopters have attacked an area along the country's border with Iraq, causing casualties. The report quoted unnamed Syrian officials and said the area is near the Syrian border town of Abu Kamal. It gave no other details on Sunday's attack.
Local residents told The Associated Press by telephone that two helicopters carrying U.S. soldiers raided the village of Hwijeh, 10 miles inside Syria's border, killing seven people and wounding five.
The U.S. military in Baghdad had no immediate comment.

So, a message has been sent:
Sovereign borders are to be ignored if you have enough firepower.
*Note to enemies: Go get lots of firepower, or this will happen to you .

 

[Mr. President]

Or if you support the terrorist who are crossing the border to kill our soldiers and then cross back to your country for safety you may experience the wrath of the US military.
Note to enemies if you harbor terrorists you are a terrorists

 

[ekrem]

This doesn't even make sense. How does having a half a trillion dollar military ensure that we have trade? Are we forcing people to trade with us because of our military, through force of arms? You must be joking. People trade with us because of our economy, not because of the number of aircraft carriers we have.

There are weak states in this world. Powerfull states like USA deploy their army in those regions to give illusion of security to those states. Primarily this has nothing to do with economy, but by giving the illusion of security to those states the governments of those countries will show a willingness of being dog of USA.
Or if there are already dogs of others like Ukraine was or still is in some way in reliance to Russia, a more aggressive US military presence in those regions will rise possibility to break that dog-master relationship to the advantage of USA, as the dog nation in the best case scenario may be considering to be mastered by USA rather then Russia or in a more likely case that government will be thinking it is in a position to play USA-Russia against each other, thinking it can behave like a bride everyone wants. Just fictional examples.

Every country has something to exploit ( i mean not collonialism but e.g. privatization). From ressources to strategic industrial plants. An aggressive US military presence in those regions will not decrease the chance of US companies will be involved in e.g. oil projects given tendered by those governments. Thinking just in oil categories is false, but here it fits well for understanding.

 

[ekrem]

Your statement is incorrect as usual.

Syria is Not Shia.

According to the CIA World Factbook.

Syria is 74% Sunni

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook.

So it is. Syria is being governed secular. If any "Arab" nation deserves that term, it is Syria.
And with 500.000 Iraqi refuges in Syria, under them definately "mujahedeens" returning from Iraq and like Jamestown-Foundation calls them "wannabe-mujahedeens" from all Arab world trying to infiltrate Iraq from Syria but being denied boarder-crossing by Syria, Syria has itself a potential terrorism problem in its own country.

 

[ekrem]

Al Qaeda was not "blowing us up" before we stationed troops in saudi arabia.

That is rethoric of Al-Qaeda. For some uneducated folks that telling of "we clean Americans from Holy Lands" will make sympathies, just what every terrorist organization needs. Continous sympathy and inflow of new "human ressources".

Expecting loyalty from terrorists and terror organizations is the great mistake a country can make. You support, arm and organize terrorists there is a high chance same force will hit you in a boomerang effect. There can be different reasons for this boomerang effect, for example
- no more support from USA for Afhanistan-fighting Islamists and now those terrorists are being played by others

 

[ekrem]

Syria's been upgrading its military through Russia lately, but most of its technology is still pretty old. 1960s-1970s Soviet Era tanks, artillery, etc. Syria could pose a serious threat to only 150,000 US troops on the ground. If Syria invaded Iraq in response to this, Israel would get involved. If Israel got involved, Iran would get involved. You would have the ultimate Sunni vs. Shi'ia war. I'm sure Turkey would find an excuse to unleash their military on the Kurds like they've been wanting to do. Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qu'tar, The UAE, would probably remain neutral since Israel would be involved. It could destabalize Afghanistan and Pakistan, which could lead to a conflict with India. If any of the Eastern European countries got involved, Russia would join in. If that happened, Western Europe would get involved. We would essentially have World War 3.

Syria has been holding peace talks with Israel for a while. It could call off the talks and expell the US ambassador to Syria. Syria also controls Lebanon and Iran controls Syria.

My gut reaction tells me this was beyond stupid. If it was Bin Laden that we killed, ok, whatever... but honestly, the US has been making almost daily cross border raids with Pakistan. Pakistan has been ignoring it. If Syria ignores this, they will look weak. Syria just got owned last year by israel when Israel took out a nuclear reactor. And all Syria did was complain. If Syria just complains again, this will encourage further attacks by the US. Assad will look weak if he doesn't do anything and there will be a bounty on his head from the radicals and Syria could turn into another Iran.

What we've done is handed power to Syria waiting for their response. What we've also done is violated the sovreignty of another nation. You can make the excuses for Afghanistan, we had a UN resolution supporting that. You have a problem with Iraq, but right now we're there with the new government's permission. We've had drones go into Pakistan, but this is the first time since Iraq that the US military has had actual soldiers on the ground of another foreign country. You can't just take matters into your own hands here and make cross border raids into Syria.

The truth is Syria can do nothing against US violations of its territory. It can just intensify (if you believe it already does) or again take-up (if you think it had stopped it) the support what is being called "assymetric warfare" via foreign bodies of factual Syrian military institution. Syria is in no position to invade Iraq or make direct war with USA.
Syria is defensive and if anything they are in a league to invade Lebanon. Where they had to redeploy by international pressure anyway.

 

[Turboswede]

Once again the US has shown that the only borders we will respect are those protected by nuclear arms. I also think its classic that people thought Syria was a Shiite country when it is governed by the Bath party (yes same party as Saddam, but they didn’t get along).

This is why Iran will not, for any reason, in any realistic situation, ever, voluntarily give up its nuclear program. They have seen that nuclear weapons are the only true limit on US expansionism. Whoever is elected will have a tough choice, either allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons, or go to war, it’s that simple. Oh they may postpone and have talks and mediation, but by not taking action the US is allowing Iran time to develop a nuclear capability.

Trouble is, war with Iran will not be a counter insurgency against a disorganized rabble who’s most effective weapon is the “Improvised Explosive Device” but an organized fanatic army with relatively new weapons and (most significantly) a will to fight.

 

[Gunny]

Once again the US has shown that the only borders we will respect are those protected by nuclear arms. I also think its classic that people thought Syria was a Shiite country when it is governed by the Bath party (yes same party as Saddam, but they didn’t get along).

This is why Iran will not, for any reason, in any realistic situation, ever, voluntarily give up its nuclear program. They have seen that nuclear weapons are the only true limit on US expansionism. Whoever is elected will have a tough choice, either allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons, or go to war, it’s that simple. Oh they may postpone and have talks and mediation, but by not taking action the US is allowing Iran time to develop a nuclear capability.

Trouble is, war with Iran will not be a counter insurgency against a disorganized rabble who’s most effective weapon is the “Improvised Explosive Device” but an organized fanatic army with relatively new weapons and (most significantly) a will to fight.

Just about as classic as your spelling of "Ba'ath", Einstein. You sure showed them.