Syria

[walksalone]

Putin, causing problems once again...

 

http://news.yahoo.com/g8-urges-syria-peace-talks-fighting-flares-north-000319529.html

[BigRedBuster]

This is not going to turn out good.

[carlfense]

This is not going to turn out good.

Agreed. The airstrikes/cruise missile strikes are coming.

[Junior]

This is not going to turn out good.

 

Nope. I don't want to get into another war, but something has to be done after the chemical weapons strike.

[zoogs]

I'm quite skeptical about all of this. I can't claim to be well acquainted with all the goings on in Syria, but my impression has been that the government has had the extreme upper hand against the rebels. Why in the world would they use chemical weapons on the populace when they are pounding the rebels into submission the good old fashioned away? Especially with such watchful eyes on them.

 

And then after finally acquiescing to demands for UN inspectors, the Syrian government sends snipers to shoot at them? I don't think anybody believes this, but if it's not them, it's likely to be one of the groups of the fractured rebels.

 

This smacks of posturing by the losing side to me. They have little hope in the short and long term in this civil conflict, and their only hope really is to draw in the international powers to strike a blow on their behalf. They're not stupid, they know that playing the humanitarian angle is the way to do it. All it takes is isolated groups with the means and the desperation - as well as the lack of qualms.

 

I don't especially believe in pure unadulterated evil. The Syrian government is also not stupid. The loudly proclaimed consensus now by our Western governments seems to be that there is no doubt that they are not only stupid, but manically suicidal and unequivocally evil.

 

We've already toppled one regime there for the sake of U.S. interests, without U.N. support, on WMD claims and then had to throw up our hands and say, "woops, sorry. intelligence failures lol."

[Conga3]

I'm quite skeptical about all of this. I can't claim to be well acquainted with all the goings on in Syria, but my impression has been that the government has had the extreme upper hand against the rebels. Why in the world would they use chemical weapons on the populace when they are pounding the rebels into submission the good old fashioned away? Especially with such watchful eyes on them.

 

And then after finally acquiescing to demands for UN inspectors, the Syrian government sends snipers to shoot at them? I don't think anybody believes this, but if it's not them, it's likely to be one of the groups of the fractured rebels.

 

This smacks of posturing by the losing side to me. They have little hope in the short and long term in this civil conflict, and their only hope really is to draw in the international powers to strike a blow on their behalf. They're not stupid, they know that playing the humanitarian angle is the way to do it. All it takes is isolated groups with the means and the desperation - as well as the lack of qualms.

 

I don't especially believe in pure unadulterated evil. The Syrian government is also not stupid. The loudly proclaimed consensus now by our Western governments seems to be that there is no doubt that they are not only stupid, but manically suicidal and unequivocally evil.

 

We've already toppled one regime there for the sake of U.S. interests, without U.N. support, on WMD claims and then had to throw up our hands and say, "woops, sorry. intelligence failures lol."

 

I'd be careful allowing yourself to see this conflict and events through this prism. You are making some rather silly conclusions from false assumptions. Being skeptical is one thing...and healthy. You, however, are regurgitating loose talking points that would make the Kremlin propaganda arm jealous.

[JJ Husker]

I'm tired of this sh#t. There was a time when I felt we were doing good stepping into something like this, preventing genocide and standing up for people who were incapable of helping themselves. No more. It's time they pay the price for having such a dysfunctional society. Unfortunately it will more than likely be the most innocent in the area who pay the heaviest price but, whatever. When those innocents get tired of getting pushed around, they're going to have to figure out how to build a society that is not in a constant state of war. Let em kill each other and the strongest survives. The only way they stop hating us is to stay the hell out of it. I'm with those who say let our enemies kill our enemies. And I don't care what happens with the oil. I really, really don't care anymore. One broken fingernail on an American soldier is too high of a price to pay for that shithole region of the world. No aid, no forces, no help. f#*k em.

[BigRedBuster]

I'm tired of this sh#t. There was a time when I felt we were doing good stepping into something like this, preventing genocide and standing up for people who were incapable of helping themselves. No more. It's time they pay the price for having such a dysfunctional society. Unfortunately it will more than likely be the most innocent in the area who pay the heaviest price but, whatever. When those innocents get tired of getting pushed around, they're going to have to figure out how to build a society that is not in a constant state of war. Let em kill each other and the strongest survives. The only way they stop hating us is to stay the hell out of it. I'm with those who say let our enemies kill our enemies. And I don't care what happens with the oil. I really, really don't care anymore. One broken fingernail on an American soldier is too high of a price to pay for that shithole region of the world. No aid, no forces, no help. f#*k em.

 

 

Not too far off from my feelings anymore.

[BigRedBuster]

I'm quite skeptical about all of this. I can't claim to be well acquainted with all the goings on in Syria, but my impression has been that the government has had the extreme upper hand against the rebels. Why in the world would they use chemical weapons on the populace when they are pounding the rebels into submission the good old fashioned away? Especially with such watchful eyes on them.

 

And then after finally acquiescing to demands for UN inspectors, the Syrian government sends snipers to shoot at them? I don't think anybody believes this, but if it's not them, it's likely to be one of the groups of the fractured rebels.

 

This smacks of posturing by the losing side to me. They have little hope in the short and long term in this civil conflict, and their only hope really is to draw in the international powers to strike a blow on their behalf. They're not stupid, they know that playing the humanitarian angle is the way to do it. All it takes is isolated groups with the means and the desperation - as well as the lack of qualms.

 

I don't especially believe in pure unadulterated evil. The Syrian government is also not stupid. The loudly proclaimed consensus now by our Western governments seems to be that there is no doubt that they are not only stupid, but manically suicidal and unequivocally evil.

 

We've already toppled one regime there for the sake of U.S. interests, without U.N. support, on WMD claims and then had to throw up our hands and say, "woops, sorry. intelligence failures lol."

 

I'd be careful allowing yourself to see this conflict and events through this prism. You are making some rather silly conclusions from false assumptions. Being skeptical is one thing...and healthy. You, however, are regurgitating loose talking points that would make the Kremlin propaganda arm jealous.

 

 

Please explain.

 

What "talking points" are you talking about? All I read from his comments was that he isn't convinced it was the government that did this and it could be the rebels doing it to try to get the world against their enemy. Hmmmm...nothing in that part of the world surprises me anymore so I can't rule this out.

 

If that is what you are talking about, then how is that a "talking point"?

[zoogs]

Yeah, maybe, Conga, but I still have a lot of difficulty wrapping my head around this. If we're to accept the accusations, the Syrian government decided to go chemical weapons nuts one day on their citizens based on the gross miscalculation that they could just say to the world later "Hey, why would we?" and get away with it. That they either didn't recognize this risk at all, or they calculated that whatever objective they would achieve would be worth it. But what did they achieve in this attack?

 

Please correct my false assumptions by the way -- I've noted that I don't know everything that's going on over there so some of my understandings could be wrong. And if they are I'd like to be corrected in detail. Thanks!

[sd'sker]

we need to get involved to ensure the old adage "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it" remains true.

[Conga3]

we need to get involved to ensure the old adage "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it" remains true.

Yeah, maybe, Conga, but I still have a lot of difficulty wrapping my head around this. If we're to accept the accusations, the Syrian government decided to go chemical weapons nuts one day on their citizens based on the gross miscalculation that they could just say to the world later "Hey, why would we?" and get away with it. That they either didn't recognize this risk at all, or they calculated that whatever objective they would achieve would be worth it. But what did they achieve in this attack?

 

Please correct my false assumptions by the way -- I've noted that I don't know everything that's going on over there so some of my understandings could be wrong. And if they are I'd like to be corrected in detail. Thanks!

 

First, let me admit when I first heard the news I immediately had all the same thoughts run through my head....and they still pop in there occasionally. It's just too convenient a scenario. Obama maybe has concluded he needs to bomb Assad out of office. He won't get UNSC approval (Russia/China). He won't act alone. He'll need to build a coalition of nations that currently have ZERO interest in going to war....unless CHEMICAL WEAPONS!

 

So fill in the blank conspiracy theory about how the CIA _____ the weapons to ______ and now the world thinks Syria has crossed the "red line".

 

Then, WAR.

 

I get it. I do.

 

Except...

 

---

 

Your first assumption that I will argue with. Assad/Syria Gov has the extreme upper hand. I'm not sure the measuring stick you are using. They may indeed be "winning" or in "more control" than they are "losing"... but it's hard to look at a map of Syria (see below) with much of the country in rebel control and conclude the government is about to squash the rebellion. Certainly debatable though - I'm no expert either.

 

 

---

 

The second assumption I read - was Syria views the use of chemical weapons the same way we (Americans) do. I don't believe they do. It's an effective weapon and is very much the pinnacle of the Syrian military might. Used effectively, it can demoralize an enemy force that is not equipped to counter it and it can scare the bejesus out of a civilian population that is propping up the rebels. They've openly acquired and developed chemical weapons whenever they've had the chance for a long time now.

 

We look at is as barbaric weaponry fit to be used by only those who have pure evil flowing through their veins. They might just view it as another military option - an effective one at that. You don't have to kill a lot of people with chemical weapons to decimate an army of volunteers without gas masks and a civilian population that is supporting them. FEAR is the real weapon. Don't get hung up on the death toll stats.

 

---

 

RE: UN Inspectors. Shooting at a UN convoy is a good way to get them to turn around and delay them a day or so. I'm pretty sure that was stolen from Saddam's old playbook. You let them in, only to delay them some how. It's certainly not unheard of to play games with inspectors like this.

 

---

 

RE: Rebels have more motive, they did it. -

Actually I believe IRAN has more motive to get us to engage Syria so they can attack Israel - but that's just another conspiracy theory to counter yours

 

--

 

RE: Iraq WMD / Whoops

Whatever. This is a Syria thread. I won't touch this.

[walksalone]

This is not going to turn out good.

 

Nope. I don't want to get into another war, but something has to be done after the chemical weapons strike.

 

I disagree, nothing needs to be done... This is a job for the U.N., not the U.S. This is where you see pictures of the blue helmets running around...

 

The only way we get involved, is we go over there, and starting f*cking everyone up (syrian army, the rebels, anybody else that wants a piece), and set up a U.S. friendly regime, otherwise, let them gas each other into oblivion...

Edited August 27, 2013 by walksalone

[Ratt Mhule]

I'm tired of this sh#t. There was a time when I felt we were doing good stepping into something like this, preventing genocide and standing up for people who were incapable of helping themselves. No more. It's time they pay the price for having such a dysfunctional society. Unfortunately it will more than likely be the most innocent in the area who pay the heaviest price but, whatever. When those innocents get tired of getting pushed around, they're going to have to figure out how to build a society that is not in a constant state of war. Let em kill each other and the strongest survives. The only way they stop hating us is to stay the hell out of it. I'm with those who say let our enemies kill our enemies. And I don't care what happens with the oil. I really, really don't care anymore. One broken fingernail on an American soldier is too high of a price to pay for that shithole region of the world. No aid, no forces, no help. f#*k em.

 

You of all people, I would not have thought would ever say something like this. This whole comment makes me sick, but especially the bolded part. You claim to be Christian and love your "brothers and sisters" and then you say this?

[BigRedBuster]

we need to get involved to ensure the old adage "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it" remains true.

Yeah, maybe, Conga, but I still have a lot of difficulty wrapping my head around this. If we're to accept the accusations, the Syrian government decided to go chemical weapons nuts one day on their citizens based on the gross miscalculation that they could just say to the world later "Hey, why would we?" and get away with it. That they either didn't recognize this risk at all, or they calculated that whatever objective they would achieve would be worth it. But what did they achieve in this attack?

 

Please correct my false assumptions by the way -- I've noted that I don't know everything that's going on over there so some of my understandings could be wrong. And if they are I'd like to be corrected in detail. Thanks!

 

First, let me admit when I first heard the news I immediately had all the same thoughts run through my head....and they still pop in there occasionally. It's just too convenient a scenario. Obama maybe has concluded he needs to bomb Assad out of office. He won't get UNSC approval (Russia/China). He won't act alone. He'll need to build a coalition of nations that currently have ZERO interest in going to war....unless CHEMICAL WEAPONS!

 

So fill in the blank conspiracy theory about how the CIA _____ the weapons to ______ and now the world thinks Syria has crossed the "red line".

 

Then, WAR.

 

I get it. I do.

 

Except...

 

---

 

Your first assumption that I will argue with. Assad/Syria Gov has the extreme upper hand. I'm not sure the measuring stick you are using. They may indeed be "winning" or in "more control" than they are "losing"... but it's hard to look at a map of Syria (see below) with much of the country in rebel control and conclude the government is about to squash the rebellion. Certainly debatable though - I'm no expert either.

 

 

---

 

The second assumption I read - was Syria views the use of chemical weapons the same way we (Americans) do. I don't believe they do. It's an effective weapon and is very much the pinnacle of the Syrian military might. Used effectively, it can demoralize an enemy force that is not equipped to counter it and it can scare the bejesus out of a civilian population that is propping up the rebels. They've openly acquired and developed chemical weapons whenever they've had the chance for a long time now.

 

We look at is as barbaric weaponry fit to be used by only those who have pure evil flowing through their veins. They might just view it as another military option - an effective one at that. You don't have to kill a lot of people with chemical weapons to decimate an army of volunteers without gas masks and a civilian population that is supporting them. FEAR is the real weapon. Don't get hung up on the death toll stats.

 

---

 

RE: UN Inspectors. Shooting at a UN convoy is a good way to get them to turn around and delay them a day or so. I'm pretty sure that was stolen from Saddam's old playbook. You let them in, only to delay them some how. It's certainly not unheard of to play games with inspectors like this.

 

---

 

RE: Rebels have more motive, they did it. -

Actually I believe IRAN has more motive to get us to engage Syria so they can attack Israel - but that's just another conspiracy theory to counter yours

 

--

 

RE: Iraq WMD / Whoops

Whatever. This is a Syria thread. I won't touch this.

 

 

Interesting discussion points.

 

However, I'm not sure Zoogie's post brought up some of those.