War With Syria: Yea Or Nay?

[U2Edge]

If the United States had deployed a significant number of troops in Western Europe before the start of World War I, World War I would not of happened.

If the Allies had acted against Germany in 1935 and enforced the treaties from World War I, Hitler would have been removed from the scene with relatively little loss of life compared to World War II.

The cruise missile launches proposed by Obama will not only come from ships but also air platforms like the B-2 Bomber and other aircraft. The United States also has large numbers of ALCM's Air Launched Cruise Missiles.

Also the Cruise Missile ranges and stand off distances for firing outrange anything Syria has.

Also a United States Aircraft Carrier is now moving up the Red Sea toward the area.

if one would know where one would fell - he will put a soft mattress there.

US is not a world policeman or the world nanny.

And should not be.

ENOUGH

Launching a Cruise Missile strike against Syria does not make the United States the worlds policeman or nanny.

 

[Circe]

WE KNOW THIS TIME WHO LAUNCHED THE ATTACK!

No, we do not know who launched that attack.

It may very well have been the rebels, desperate and making last stand, trying to get usto come in on their side by gassing their own people.

My belief is that is what happened.



Are we all remembering that our government and all governments past and present lies and lies and lies and lies?

This government will lie us into war to clean up Iran if they can. Do you want that? Remember that lying to the American people is a NORMAL way to fool us into war. WMD in Iraq, Tonkin Gulf, Remember the Maine.

 

[Mr Natural]

With our technology, shouldn't we be able to drone Assad and his people personally?

 

[Circe]

Launching a Cruise Missile strike against Syria does not make the United States the worlds policeman or nanny.

Of course it does!! That's the whole POINT of us doing it, rather than France; rather than Britain; rather than China, rather than the European Union.

There are plenty of Powers that COULD launch a missile strike against Syria, but everyone looks to us to do it. Why? Because we took on the world policeman role after WWII.

However, that role has probably worn out just about ------- now.

Nothing lasts forever.

 

[Hoffstra]

Launching a Cruise Missile strike against Syria does not make the United States the worlds policeman or nanny.

sure it does.

without UN authorization, it would mean that the USA has taken it upon itself to be the judge, jury, and executioner of what is "right" and "moral" in the world.

 

[Circe]

With our technology, shouldn't we be able to drone Assad and his people personally?

In theory, we can't go after a head of state unless we are in an active war against them.

Because if we do, they'll go after our head of state, like Castro had Kennedy shot.




Wait......all considered, maybe going after Assad personally is a good idea after all.

 

[Vox]

Launching a Cruise Missile strike against Syria does not make the United States the worlds policeman or nanny.

yes, it does.

it's none of our business.

They can gas themselves up.

 

[Vox]

With our technology, shouldn't we be able to drone Assad and his people personally?

In theory, we can't go after a head of state unless we are in an active war against them.

Because if we do, they'll go after our head of state, like Castro had Kennedy shot.




Wait......all considered, maybe going after Assad personally is a good idea after al.

at least it is cheaper

 

[deltex1]

With our technology, shouldn't we be able to drone Assad and his people personally?

We need a drone with balls.

 

[Circe]

If the United States had deployed a significant number of troops in Western Europe before the start of World War I, World War I would not of happened.

If the Allies had acted against Germany in 1935 and enforced the treaties from World War I, Hitler would have been removed from the scene with relatively little loss of life compared to World War II.

I am sure you are perfectly correct!! AND -- if Martian tripods had landed either of those times, the whole word would have united on the side of Humankind and not had world wars at all! [Sigh]

Moving right along, however, to 2013 and reality.....

Also a United States Aircraft Carrier is now moving up the Red Sea toward the area.

Our aircraft carriers are the very incarnation of sitting duckiness. It swims like a duck, it quacks like a duck, it sinks like a shot duck........

Good way to get a war started with Iran. Expect piles of lies coming up from your government.

 

[percysunshine]

Where is Samantha Powers? Does she play golf?

 

[Circe]

...launching a single missile to destroy an empty building in Damascus?

It will probably be about 300 cruise missiles and Assad will get the message and that will be it. You'll see.

Well, which is it gonna be? First you say Oobop will launch a single missile into an empty building, second you say it's sure to be 300 cruise missiles.

These are not the same.

Anyway, I think the whole point is to clean up Iran, but so far, the heritage of the Iraq debacle is that no one believes Obama's stupid WMD claims, because Bush's were false and we know they were meant to lie us into war.

This is the same deal, IMO. But Congress MAY stop it.

May.

 

[georgephillip]

I have not voted in this poll because its not asking the right question. Going to War with Syria and launching a limited missile strike are two different things. You will get different poll results depending how the poll is worded! Unfortunately the mods have closed my poll with the different wording. I hope they re-open it.

Do you believe that will be the end of U.S. military action against Syria?

Yes, because Assad can't afford to have continued US military strikes against his military when its struggling to fight the rebels in his country. Assad stops Chemical weapon use, no more US military strikes. Mission accomplished and Assad continues to fight his war with just conventional weapons like he has done for most of the past 2 and half years.

Where's your proof that Asaad has used chemical weapons?

 

[U2Edge]

...launching a single missile to destroy an empty building in Damascus?

It will probably be about 300 cruise missiles and Assad will get the message and that will be it. You'll see.

Well, which is it gonna be? First you say Oobop will launch a single missile into an empty building, second you say it's sure to be 300 cruise missiles.

These are not the same.

Anyway, I think the whole point is to clean up Iran, but so far, the heritage of the Iraq debacle is that no one believes Obama's stupid WMD claims, because Bush's were false and we know they were meant to lie us into war.

This is the same deal, IMO. But Congress MAY stop it.

May.

I NEVER said that would be the attack, I responding to your point that WAR is WAR no matter the action so I asked you if an invasion of 200,000 troops was the same as a cruise missile hitting an empty building. You still have yet to answer my question.

Saddam did at one time have WMD and he had lied and cheated the UN inspectors in the years after the first Gulf War and was selling Billions of dollars of oil illegally on the black market and was getting out from under the containment box he had been put in. It was a necessity to remove Saddam.

Its amazing how many supporters Saddam and Assad have in this forum!

 

[U2Edge]

Do you believe that will be the end of U.S. military action against Syria?

Yes, because Assad can't afford to have continued US military strikes against his military when its struggling to fight the rebels in his country. Assad stops Chemical weapon use, no more US military strikes. Mission accomplished and Assad continues to fight his war with just conventional weapons like he has done for most of the past 2 and half years.

Where's your proof that Asaad has used chemical weapons?

Everywhere! Take a look for yourself:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2GPTqxf8rE&bpctr=1378150074]Syria chemical weapons - Sarin gas attack near Damascus? - Truthloader - YouTube[/ame]

A very broad area was hit, too broad an area and concentration levels too great for it to have been rebels with their limited delivery means!

 

[U2Edge]

If the United States had deployed a significant number of troops in Western Europe before the start of World War I, World War I would not of happened.

If the Allies had acted against Germany in 1935 and enforced the treaties from World War I, Hitler would have been removed from the scene with relatively little loss of life compared to World War II.

I am sure you are perfectly correct!! AND -- if Martian tripods had landed either of those times, the whole word would have united on the side of Humankind and not had world wars at all! [Sigh]

Moving right along, however, to 2013 and reality.....

Also a United States Aircraft Carrier is now moving up the Red Sea toward the area.

Our aircraft carriers are the very incarnation of sitting duckiness. It swims like a duck, it quacks like a duck, it sinks like a shot duck........

Good way to get a war started with Iran. Expect piles of lies coming up from your government.

And when was the last time a U.S. Aircraft Carrier was sunk?

 

[R.C. Christian]

Where is Samantha Powers? Does she play golf?

She's only useful when the U.S is forced to pay token homage to the U.N. so they can Convince them to do silly things for the sake of imperium such as establishing no fly zones over Libya.

 

[U2Edge]

Launching a Cruise Missile strike against Syria does not make the United States the worlds policeman or nanny.

yes, it does.

it's none of our business.

They can gas themselves up.

It is our business when it comes to WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION! There will be consequences to not responding.

 

[U2Edge]

Launching a Cruise Missile strike against Syria does not make the United States the worlds policeman or nanny.

sure it does.

without UN authorization, it would mean that the USA has taken it upon itself to be the judge, jury, and executioner of what is "right" and "moral" in the world.

Responding to contain the use of WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION is acting in the self defense of the United States. An increase in possession and use of Weapons of Mass Destruction is a serious threat to the United States and the rest of the world.

The United States does not need UN authorization to protect itself!

 

[U2Edge]

WE KNOW THIS TIME WHO LAUNCHED THE ATTACK!

No, we do not know who launched that attack.

It may very well have been the rebels, desperate and making last stand, trying to get usto come in on their side by gassing their own people.

My belief is that is what happened.



Are we all remembering that our government and all governments past and present lies and lies and lies and lies?

This government will lie us into war to clean up Iran if they can. Do you want that? Remember that lying to the American people is a NORMAL way to fool us into war. WMD in Iraq, Tonkin Gulf, Remember the Maine.

How exactly would the rebels be able to disperse such chemicals in those levels of quantities over such a wide area? The Syrian army has the MEANS to do that as they have the heavy weapons and other equipment. Most rebel heavy weapons only consist of motars and RPG's. Not the correct delivery systems to launch the largest Sarin Gas attack in a quarter of a century!

Finally, the NSA monitors the communications of the Syrian military. We know they did it because we have the audio for the orders. Radar saw the launch of the missiles and artillery, news reporters recorded the impact when they got to the area.