War With Syria: Yea Or Nay?

[skye]

There is no need for a war with Syria!

Everybody who says otherwise is a warmonger!


NO NEED FOR A WAR WITH SYRIA!

 

[rhodescholar]

Since ISIS is backed by those Iraqi Generals who were dismissed after the Iraq War, who knows how much money they had stashed away during the Saddam Hussein's regime. Does anyone honestly think that all those coming from different parts of the world to join ISIS would have been able to conquer all that territory if they weren't led by experienced military men. Probably if these generals had been kept on, there would never have been any group called ISIS. As for weapons, there are arms dealers all over who will sell arms to anyone willing to pay for them.

As it was stated by ISIS when they first appeared on the scene, that Syria was the stepping stone to the new Caliphate. They saw the chaos in Syria due to the Civil War, and saw their chance then to begin their start on their dream of a Caliphate.

There are many articles on the Internet about the leaders of ISIS being ex-Iraqi generals. Here is one of them.

How Disbanding the Iraqi Army Fueled ISIS

I agree with this but think as usual, the problem was with iran who whipped up and forced the iraqi shias to demand the army be disbanded. They wanted it gone so they would have (like hez in lebanon) a weak national army to give them a free hand to stir up trouble and intimidate the sunnis without fearing any blowback. They wanted to be able to kill politicians, journalists and activists in iraq who would challenge them, ethnically cleanse sunnis out of various cities/regions, and be able to operate under iran's controlling hand without the threat of a national army. And they wanted to be able to force lots of sunnis out of government bureaucratic positions - which they did - which also led to a lot of anger and support to form ISIS, which was primarily a response to the iranian-driven sunni oppression in iraq.

Had the US told iran to fuck off, retained the national army, and crushed all of the shia militias, the sunnis would have remained empowered and not felt a need to form a group to protect them like ISIS. But the shit lazy media, and anti-american filth, prefer to lie and tell people that ISIS was "started by the US" - which is absolute garbage.

 

[rhodescholar]

War with Syria!

NO!

A resounding NO!

got it?

Got what? That you are incapable of a rational sentence?

 

[paulitician]

Bin Laden's group and other radical groups worked closely with the CIA in Afghanistan. They couldn't have defeated the Soviets without the CIA.

You fringies create an alternative reality that you eventually begin to believe. There is no historical fact to the nonsense you so desperately cling to. Under Jimmy Carter, the USA began supplying the Mujahadeen with arm, particularly the Stinger hand held SAM that could down a KA-50 Hokum, the Russian gun ships that were shredding the Afghan resistance. The CIA provided training on these and other arms.

Osama bin Laden was not involved in these efforts or training.

Allegations of CIA assistance to Osama bin Laden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No, those assertions are preposterous. Of course Bin Laden's group received money, weapons, and training from American/Saudi/Pakistani intelligence agencies. It was vital to the effort to oust the Soviets. Bin Laden's group was just one of many radical Islamist groups to receive American support.

Idiot, the taliban is not al qaeda you stupid fucking bottom-feeding moron.

They basically merged at one point dummy. And they both did receive support from the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan.

 

[paulitician]

Boy, you sure are all in on that American Government/Corporate Media propaganda thing. The U.S. is the main cause of all the bloody carnage we're currently seeing in the Middle East. It had no valid or legal justification to declare 'Regime Change' and intervene in Syria's Civil War. Period, end of story.

Stupid asshole, who has been barrel-bombing whole cities for YEARS? That was assad.

Moron, who sent in militias to slaughter women and children at Houla and Baniyas? That was assad.

Fucking retard, it would be so much better if pieces of shit like you just stopped posting.

It's their Civil War. The U.S. had no valid or legal justification to intervene. I truly believe we need to disengage from the Middle East at this point. We are the source of most of the bloody chaos there. We don't belong in those lands. Time to come home.

 

[paulitician]

Bin Laden's group and other radical groups worked closely with the CIA in Afghanistan. They couldn't have defeated the Soviets without the CIA.

You fringies create an alternative reality that you eventually begin to believe. There is no historical fact to the nonsense you so desperately cling to. Under Jimmy Carter, the USA began supplying the Mujahadeen with arm, particularly the Stinger hand held SAM that could down a KA-50 Hokum, the Russian gun ships that were shredding the Afghan resistance. The CIA provided training on these and other arms.

Osama bin Laden was not involved in these efforts or training.

Allegations of CIA assistance to Osama bin Laden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is a stark similarity of the posts from low IQ filth like that poster, and many others who claim the US started the syrian war, defend assad/iran/russia, etc. I believe that they are pro-putin russian internet trolling turds who are trying to misinform and misdirect the facts about assad, iran and russian tactics which have killed over 500K people there, and caused millions of refugees.

Why did the U.S. intervene in Syria's Civil War? Assad never committed a hostile act against his neighbors or the U.S. We went over there and created horrific gangs like ISIS and decimated that country. But why?

Because it's all about getting that Puppet Regime in there and plundering resources. Syria must have something the Western Global Elites want very badly. The Syrian Civil War was never any of our business. We shouldn't have gotten involved. Now more chickens are gonna come home to roost as a result. Bloody Blow Back is coming.

 

[paulitician]

War with Syria!

NO!

A resounding NO!

got it?

Unfortunately, that ship sailed a long time ago. We've been bombing & killing in Syria for awhile now. Someone dug this old post up. But at the time, it was clear most Americans didn't want anything to do with war in Syria. However, the Global Elites eventually got their war anyway. They always do. They'll always come up with a Boogeyman for the Sheeple to fear & hate. It's ISIS today, but it'll be another flavor of the week Boogeyman tomorrow.

It's all about the Permanent War and plundering resources. The Elites have found that endless war keeps the Sheeple in line. They believe keeping the Sheeple in fear helps convince them to support all wars, all the time. And i have to say, they're 100% correct on that assessment. The Sheeple, especially American Sheeple, will support any war just as long as it doesn't interrupt stuffing their fat faces, watching their porn/sports/reality tv, social media addictions, and so on. Fear works. The Elites have proven that, with the overwhelming American support for Permanent War.

 

[rhodescholar]

Why did the U.S. intervene in Syria's Civil War? Assad never committed a hostile act against his neighbors or the U.S.

Asshole, how many times do you plan to state this lie?

 

[paulitician]

Why did the U.S. intervene in Syria's Civil War? Assad never committed a hostile act against his neighbors or the U.S.

Asshole, how many times do you plan to state this lie?

List all the nations Syria has invaded and bombed. Then compare that list with your own Nation's list. Syria was never a threat to its neighbors or the U.S. So why try to kill Assad?

 

[rhodescholar]

List all the nations Syria has invaded and bombed. Then compare that list with your own Nation's list. Syria was never a threat to its neighbors or the U.S. So why try to kill Assad?

Why do low life, low IQ, worthless pieces of shit like you screech about every little action the US - but then twist themselves like pretzels trying to defend even the most egregious ones by enemies of the US?

I already stated - with a link - how syria/assad harbored/funded/armed terrorists attacking US troops inside iraq for years. The HQ of the terrorist insurgency was held in damascus. Those actions are tantamount to declarations of war, and assad is fortunate the US did not terminate his regime for them.

 

[paulitician]

List all the nations Syria has invaded and bombed. Then compare that list with your own Nation's list. Syria was never a threat to its neighbors or the U.S. So why try to kill Assad?

Why do low life, low IQ, worthless pieces of shit like you screech about every little action the US - but then twist themselves like pretzels trying to defend even the most egregious ones by enemies of the US?

I already stated - with a link - how syria/assad harbored/funded/armed terrorists attacking US troops inside iraq for years. The HQ of the terrorist insurgency was held in damascus. Those actions are tantamount to declarations of war, and assad is fortunate the US did not terminate his regime for them.

Bullshite. Syria merely opposed the Iraq War like some of our own allies did. And it was absolutely right to oppose it. It was a bloody horrific blunder. The U.S. had no right to invade Iraq, or declare 'Regime Change' on Assad.

In fact, some U.S./Western leaders should have been arrested and tried for War Crimes. They committed horrific crimes against humanity in Iraq. If the U.S/West didn't own the International Justice System, those arrests would have happened.

 

[candycorn]

A major poll today showed only 19% of Americans in favor of this war!!

Is it really wise to go to war with that kind of opposition??

Oobop could get impeached, couldn't he?

Breaking NEWS

U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 10-7, approves a resolution authorizing a U.S. military response to chemical weapons use in Syria!

Great, once again we declare ourselves the world's morality police and put our citizens at risk.

Every congressman who votes for this lunacy should be tarred and feathered.

And your feelings now, Trump bot?

 

[TooTall]

List all the nations Syria has invaded and bombed. Then compare that list with your own Nation's list. Syria was never a threat to its neighbors or the U.S. So why try to kill Assad?

Why do low life, low IQ, worthless pieces of shit like you screech about every little action the US - but then twist themselves like pretzels trying to defend even the most egregious ones by enemies of the US?

I already stated - with a link - how syria/assad harbored/funded/armed terrorists attacking US troops inside iraq for years. The HQ of the terrorist insurgency was held in damascus. Those actions are tantamount to declarations of war, and assad is fortunate the US did not terminate his regime for them.

Bullshite. Syria merely opposed the Iraq War like some of our own allies did. And it was absolutely right to oppose it. It was a bloody horrific blunder. The U.S. had no right to invade Iraq, or declare 'Regime Change' on Assad.

In fact, some U.S./Western leaders should have been arrested and tried for War Crimes. They committed horrific crimes against humanity in Iraq. If the U.S/West didn't own the International Justice System, those arrests would have happened.

Obama is no longer President and he is the only one who has declared Regime Change on Assad. Of course the invasion of Iraq was completely justified. The UN and the US Congress so voted. Here are just two of the reasons.

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particular grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

 

[Foxfyre]

Boy, you sure are all in on that American Government/Corporate Media propaganda thing. The U.S. is the main cause of all the bloody carnage we're currently seeing in the Middle East. It had no valid or legal justification to declare 'Regime Change' and intervene in Syria's Civil War. Period, end of story.

Stupid asshole, who has been barrel-bombing whole cities for YEARS? That was assad.

Moron, who sent in militias to slaughter women and children at Houla and Baniyas? That was assad.

Fucking retard, it would be so much better if pieces of shit like you just stopped posting.

It's their Civil War. The U.S. had no valid or legal justification to intervene. I truly believe we need to disengage from the Middle East at this point. We are the source of most of the bloody chaos there. We don't belong in those lands. Time to come home.

I do not want war in the Middle East. But what if the U.S. had not joined the fight in WWII? Okay we didn't do so voluntarily, but there was little chance Germany was going to attack our mainland even after declaring war on us. But had we not gone, the Third Reich would now be in control of most of Europe and perhaps western Asia. And all the Jews remaining in those lands would have been exterminated.

What if we had not intervened in the Middle East when Saddam took Kuwait and and was threatening to invade a mostly unarmed Saudi Arabia? Would Saddam now be in control of most of the Middle East?

And now we are watching the horrific and cruel gassing of men, women, and children in Syria as well as all the other well documented genocide that has been going on. Do we just sit on our hands and do nothing because it is none of our business when we have the power to intervene?

And even acknowledging that we cannot be the policeman or savior of the entire world, what is our duty as honorable human beings in the face of such suffering that we have the power to end?

No easy answers here.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[


And your feelings now, Trump bot?

Trump offered a measured and rational response to Assad. It was a good move, sending a message with no casualties. Syria is none of our affair, BUT Obama armed and trained ISIS, stirring the pot. This means that the measured response was the best option under the circumstances.

 

[candycorn]

[


And your feelings now, Trump bot?

Trump offered a measured and rational response to Assad. It was a good move, sending a message with no casualties. Syria is none of our affair, BUT Obama armed and trained ISIS, stirring the pot. This means that the measured response was the best option under the circumstances.

Oh shut the fuck up. Obama didn’t train or arm ISIS.

A measured response? Trump missed the runway—about 7,000 feet long or so. And the guy who the message was intended for launched raids out of the same base the next day. It was almost as worthless as you. Fuck off.

 

[Bleipriester]

[


And your feelings now, Trump bot?

Trump offered a measured and rational response to Assad. It was a good move, sending a message with no casualties. Syria is none of our affair, BUT Obama armed and trained ISIS, stirring the pot. This means that the measured response was the best option under the circumstances.

It was an illegal response justified by a self-made criminal pretext. The same what Obama tried in 2013. Phrump´s missiles are garbage and all he achieved is that Syria´s allies increase their support and that the Coalition suspended Syria flights. Missile strikes are what Obama planned by the way. Phrump is the new Ubumu.

 

[Foxfyre]

Since ISIS is backed by those Iraqi Generals who were dismissed after the Iraq War, who knows how much money they had stashed away during the Saddam Hussein's regime. Does anyone honestly think that all those coming from different parts of the world to join ISIS would have been able to conquer all that territory if they weren't led by experienced military men. Probably if these generals had been kept on, there would never have been any group called ISIS. As for weapons, there are arms dealers all over who will sell arms to anyone willing to pay for them.

As it was stated by ISIS when they first appeared on the scene, that Syria was the stepping stone to the new Caliphate. They saw the chaos in Syria due to the Civil War, and saw their chance then to begin their start on their dream of a Caliphate.

There are many articles on the Internet about the leaders of ISIS being ex-Iraqi generals. Here is one of them.

How Disbanding the Iraqi Army Fueled ISIS

I agree with this but think as usual, the problem was with iran who whipped up and forced the iraqi shias to demand the army be disbanded. They wanted it gone so they would have (like hez in lebanon) a weak national army to give them a free hand to stir up trouble and intimidate the sunnis without fearing any blowback. They wanted to be able to kill politicians, journalists and activists in iraq who would challenge them, ethnically cleanse sunnis out of various cities/regions, and be able to operate under iran's controlling hand without the threat of a national army. And they wanted to be able to force lots of sunnis out of government bureaucratic positions - which they did - which also led to a lot of anger and support to form ISIS, which was primarily a response to the iranian-driven sunni oppression in iraq.

Had the US told iran to fuck off, retained the national army, and crushed all of the shia militias, the sunnis would have remained empowered and not felt a need to form a group to protect them like ISIS. But the shit lazy media, and anti-american filth, prefer to lie and tell people that ISIS was "started by the US" - which is absolute garbage.

I don't think Iran had much to do with that. Donald Rumsfeld, in the post mortems of the Iraq war, freely admitted that was one of their worst errors in judgment; i.e. allowing the Republican Guard to go home with their weapons. It would be those very people who spearheaded and led the insurgency that created the prolonged war that should have already been over.

But so far as going to war, I hope, I hope, I hope that we have a President who, if he agrees to go to war with ANYBODY, will do so with all stops pulled out and with the understanding that victory will be the complete and unconditional surrender of all the hostile forces in that country even if the country has to be flattened to accomplish that. And we won't pussy foot around our willingness to flatten it thus making victory short, sweet, and absolute.

And because such an extreme situation will be most unlikely to be justified, that means we won't be starting and participating in these little wars that seem to go on forever at great cost to both military and civilian lives.

The missile assault on the Syrian airfield was not a 'war'. It was swift and certain retaliation for a war crime that killed and injured a civilian target and could have endangered American lives. And I have no problem with it.