Will there be American invasion in Syria?

[♪alt13]

I'm sure Israel and France will back them up.

France couldn't even get their jets to Libya without our help. Syria is further. How is france going to back them up.

"We will send an assortment of fine wines and cheeses to any country that engages with Syria. We are sure the Americans will have no problem delivering our cheeses to you, Hon hon."

 

[Stoked]

France couldn't even get their jets to Libya without our help. Syria is further. How is france going to back them up.

"We will send an assortment of fine wines and cheeses to any country that engages with Syria. We are sure the Americans will have no problem delivering our cheeses to you, Hon hon."

France could provide them the same cover as Russia is giving to Syria. Security council member and all that.

Israel is one of the biggest dogs in that region. They could allow airspace, logistics, Intel...

 

[♪alt13]

France could provide them the same cover as Russia is giving to Syria. Security council member and all that.

Israel is one of the biggest dogs in that region. They could allow airspace, logistics, Intel...

Israel is tuff for sure.

The security council doesn't mean ****. America makes the rules and the decisions like it or not. I don't remember Israel even bothering to inform the security council when they invaded Lebanon. I'm positive the state department got at least a phone call.

We don't give a **** about Russia's vote in the security council. We care because it's ****in Russia and they the #2 bad *** on the block.

 

[Stoked]

Israel is tuff for sure.

The security council doesn't mean ****. America makes the rules and the decisions like it or not. I don't remember Israel even bothering to inform the security council when they invaded Lebanon. I'm positive the state department got at least a phone call.

We don't give a **** about Russia's vote in the security council. We care because it's ****in Russia and they the #2 bad *** on the block.

True but it prevents UN intervention, sanctions, resolutions, statements...it's political coverage.

 

[♪alt13]

It prevents UN sanctions not US and her allies. It's almost meaningless.

 

[Stoked]

It prevents UN sanctions not US and her allies. It's almost meaningless.

Russia doesn't have NATO so any sanctions would be much less damaging.

 

[♪alt13]

Russia doesn't have NATO so any sanctions would be much less damaging.

Exactly.

We have Nato so UN is a joke.

 

[cowhide]

How can we stand around and do nothing?

Don't we owe the world something as the lone super power? Shouldn't we immediately go to any and every country that is suffering and aid them?

Or are we all a bunch of Neville Chamberlains?

Why not the US did nothing in Rwanda. It is not the job of the US to police the world. There is no way that the US can sustain financially policing the world. Should something be done. Yes but it needs to be a UN resolution where many countries agree on the solution.

Comparing the situation in Syria to WWII is idiotic. The US has to be careful in what they do simply because this situation could create a domino affect in the Middle East with a larger scale war. I think the US is damned if they do and damned if they don't but I rather let Syria figure out their future and leave the mess alone.

Besides it isn't like the rebels love America, it is horrible that chemical weapons were used but whether you die from chemical weapons or a bullet you still are dead. Yea I know it is against the rules but it is not worth having a worn out US military die for.

 

[Stoked]

Exactly.

We have Nato so UN is a joke.

Exactly but we are talking giving western cover to Saudi Arabia from Russia thru the UN. That's how the UN is defanged in this case.

 

[♪alt13]

Exactly but we are talking giving western cover to Saudi Arabia from Russia thru the UN. That's how the UN is defanged in this case.

So we agree?

UN weak
Nato strong
us, russia, israel, strong
France weak

Are you just trollin me, all hopped up on giggles?

 

[The Thriller]

Ok... 3 questions:

1. Who the hell supports this war? I don't know of a single lefty that wants this. Not even the biggest Obama fans I know want anything to do with Syria. And repubs have to be against him by default. So who other than senile McCain and maybe Michele, who supports this?

2. Why? Simple question. I know of some pretty big BS going on along the Mexican border along with some nasty stuff happening in the ghettos of Rio. If our job is to be the moral police of the world, why aren't we in those areas? Hell, Detroit might be the most dangerous place on the planet. Why not chuck a few tomahawk missiles there?

3. Does Congress go along with it? The House in particular?

 

[Stoked]

Ok... 3 questions:

1. Who the hell supports this war? I don't know of a single lefty that wants this. Not even the biggest Obama fans I know want anything to do with Syria. And repubs have to be against him by default. So who other than senile McCain and maybe Michele, who supports this?

2. Why? Simple question. I know of some pretty big BS going on along the Mexican border along with some nasty stuff happening in the ghettos of Rio. If our job is to be the moral police of the world, why aren't we in those areas? Hell, Detroit might be the most dangerous place on the planet. Why not chuck a few tomahawk missiles there?

3. Does Congress go along with it? The House in particular?

1. Recent poll says only 9% of the public support strikes. McCain, Pelosi and Fienstein are some big names that support strikes. Spare the republican default junk.

2. Agreed

3. I say it is voted down, narrowly, and the President goes ahead anyways.

 

[Gameface]

I think sanity might just prevail and we do not get involved. Maybe hopeful thinking...

 

[Stoked]

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/09/02/aust-s02.html

Australia is supporting unilateral US military strikes on Syria.

https://www.torontosun.com/2013/08/30/canadas-military-help-in-syria-whos-asking-wonders-ndp

Canada is on board as well


So that makes 7:

Canada
Australia
France
Israel
Turkey
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates

 

[Stoked]

https://www.globalpost.com/dispatch...s-backing-possible-us-military-intervention-0

Add Japan to that number.

https://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2013/09/02/2013090201249.html

Looks like S Korea is onboard in some fashion

Germany is on board pending UN, NATO or EU approval.

S Africa is against a US strike on Syria.

 

[Stoked]

Ok... 3 questions:

1. Who the hell supports this war? I don't know of a single lefty that wants this. Not even the biggest Obama fans I know want anything to do with Syria. And repubs have to be against him by default. So who other than senile McCain and maybe Michele, who supports this?

2. Why? Simple question. I know of some pretty big BS going on along the Mexican border along with some nasty stuff happening in the ghettos of Rio. If our job is to be the moral police of the world, why aren't we in those areas? Hell, Detroit might be the most dangerous place on the planet. Why not chuck a few tomahawk missiles there?

3. Does Congress go along with it? The House in particular?

McCain and Graham in the Senate are on board. Boehner in the House is on board. That is some heavy hitters on the republican side. They will sway some votes. So much for that theory.

 

[Stoked]

Names that have been listed as supporting a strike on SYria:

Reid
Pelosi
Beohner
McCain
Feinstein
Cantor
Graham

Looks like leadership on both sides are gettign behind the President. What are thinking?!?!

 

[babe]

Ok... 3 questions:

1. Who the hell supports this war? I don't know of a single lefty that wants this. Not even the biggest Obama fans I know want anything to do with Syria. And repubs have to be against him by default. So who other than senile McCain and maybe Michele, who supports this?

2. Why? Simple question. I know of some pretty big BS going on along the Mexican border along with some nasty stuff happening in the ghettos of Rio. If our job is to be the moral police of the world, why aren't we in those areas? Hell, Detroit might be the most dangerous place on the planet. Why not chuck a few tomahawk missiles there?

3. Does Congress go along with it? The House in particular?

Regional War deconstructing the Islamic world and bringing a third of the planet into the golden light of secular humanism and modern scientific enlightenment according to the dictates of Anglo-American intellectual leadership has long been in the sights of global managers with tools like NATO and the UN and the whole CFR menagerie of "thinkers". Prominent in this global agenda are the English monarchy and their camp followers, leading Western banking establishments, and western military/industrial moguls,

War is good for business, and the more people that can be just bombed to smithereens is just that much of notch in the campaign to reduce golobal population to some manageable level. . . .

So, you see, since Jimmy Carter, and even before that I'm sure. . . . there has been a reason we sent our "intelligence" agencies's darkside ops folks over there to give money to the Islamists and build up there extremist (aka "pushers" or "change agents") agitators. . . . .and that is why even Obama is doing everything possible to build up "the other side". How can you really have an effective war without another side to it?

 

[♪alt13]

Regional War deconstructing the Islamic world and bringing a third of the planet into the golden light of secular humanism and modern scientific enlightenment according to the dictates of Anglo-American intellectual leadership has long been in the sights of global managers with tools like NATO and the UN and the whole CFR menagerie of "thinkers". Prominent in this global agenda are the English monarchy and their camp followers, leading Western banking establishments, and western military/industrial moguls,

War is good for business, and the more people that can be just bombed to smithereens is just that much of notch in the campaign to reduce golobal population to some manageable level. . . .

So, you see, since Jimmy Carter, and even before that I'm sure. . . . there has been a reason we sent our "intelligence" agencies's darkside ops folks over there to give money to the Islamists and build up there extremist (aka "pushers" or "change agents") agitators. . . . .and that is why even Obama is doing everything possible to build up "the other side". How can you really have an effective war without another side to it?

Yep and we sent the CIA back in time to write the Koran. After that we sent them back in time again to divide the Islamic people into different sects and get them at each others throats. Then Aliens showed us how to turn their land into desert so we went back in time again to do that. Then we made a giant gummi bear that we used to try and catch us a magic whale so that he would grant us a wish and we could become the most powerful nation in the world.

Then the Jews sent their secret service back in time to start the Holocaust and when John Lennon found a memo proving all of this to be true they shot him.

 

[Stoked]

Yep and we sent the CIA back in time to write the Koran. After that we sent them back in time again to divide the Islamic people into different sects and get them at each others throats. Then Aliens showed us how
Yep and we sent the CIA back in time to write the Koran. After that we sent them back in time again to divide the Islamic people into different sects and get them at each others throats. Then Aliens showed us how to turn their land into desert so we went back in time again to do that. Then we made a giant gummi bear that we used to try and catch us a magic whale so that he would grant us a wish and we could become the most powerful nation in the world.

Then the Jews sent their secret service back in time to start the Holocaust and when John Lennon found a memo proving all of this to be true they shot him.

lol. Can you deny that the US, and world, has been meddling in the middle east for centuries? I can understand the resentment.