Syria
- Started
- Last post
- 253 Responses
- sem
Just interested in peoples opinions on here.
I'm not fully educated on the topic but I personally would hope all governments obtained and shared enough evidence before picking a side to help.
Though more importantly that countries alone should not be involved, more the UN united make any stand needed. This could reduce any singled out revenge attacks etc.
- uuuuuu0
Before we start this thread lets all take a moment to STFU and think of the people in Syria.
- sureshot0
Isnt Steve Jobs dad from Syria?
- colin_s0
the US needs to take a cue from walter white on this one and tread lightly
i'm never for war, but for global superpowers to sit back and watch a dictator gas his people would be like watching your redneck neighbor hit his children and never call the police (or, never step in to defend the kid).
that being said, this should be less of a war and more of an assist, the way we did in libya. drone + stealth fighter strikes at high-value military targets, try to reduce the chemical warfare going on, reduce the strength of assad.
it's a complete disaster, because of how it will play out with russia on the international stage (already super strained tensions), as well as if assad just sees his empire crumbling and decides to, say, send some missiles over into israel or something.
the entire situation needs to be handled delicately, but yeah, there's going to be some shit.
- somebody Call the UN! oh wait russia is cock block us!pango
- get out of this thread! you make too much sense.HijoDMaite
- mg330
I really hope we don't go down that road. We have no business being the world's police right now. My respect for Obama will go down the toilet in a second. Leave this shit to the UN.
- That bullshit mentality is a joke. They need our help. We're able to.CygnusZero4
- matnz0
Why is everyone immediately jumping to the conclusion that Assad was actually behind the attacks. Really? there is ABSOLUTELY nothing to gain for him bringing the whole world into the situation. It's more feasible and believable that the FSA (comprised of many muslim extremist groups) would benefit from something like this.
- nthkl0
Hopefully it can be mostly contractors, seals, drones, B2's and F117 night strikes. Less troops on the ground as possible.
- sem0
Sounds like you guys are certain there will be military efforts made. Thats a shame it would have to come to that. I agree with what Colin above said about sitting back and doing nothing is wrong, its just a shame a less military move couldn't be made to police things.
Though agree it should NOT be just the US, UK etc going into action as causing any tension with Russia would be a bad move. And did I hear China are siding with Russia? those are two powers right there I would NOT want to be ignoring for the sake of suspected crimes.
Again, proof, evidence, facts need to come before anything surely? maybe then Russia etc could be brought on side to deal with it.
- CygnusZero40
100,000 of their people have already died from normal weapons, and now they are starting with chemical weapons.
This isnt about being the world police. Those people need our help and we're able to help them. It's about doing the right thing. It's only with good intentions to help people who are obviously unable to help themselves.
Typical internet derps are always like the US is just being the world police. It's because theyre able to help and like helping others. Its what good people do when they have the means. This isnt pointless war mongering. Who the F would just sit back and watch 100,000+ people be killed? That's just as evil as the people that are doing the killing in my book.
- I'm all for helping out when we can. Howabout we work on some shit here for a change.capn_ron
- We (US, UK, France etc) have already sat back and watched thousands being killed. Why haven't we steeped in already?goldieboy
- Chemical warfare is banned, yep. But there has to be a reason for not moving before now?goldieboy
- Assad must have some serious political knowledge/connection... with the west for us to do nothing; don't you think?goldieboy
- We are working on things are home. This cant be ignored though.CygnusZero4
- Doesnt matter whats going on here, this situation needs to be fixed regardless.CygnusZero4
- Send in the drones!instrmntl
- utopian0
I used the date the "Syrian girl" before she became a hit on youtube and lost her marbles.
- colin_s0
not to mention the 1 million child refugees from syria. it's dystopic over there.
make no mistake - this IS the united states playing world police. but unlike the past 10+ years of global intervention, this is the one time where the US has a logical reason to be the world police.
it's like in "the wire," where there are the "good" police who know the neighborhood and stop the distress when people are in disarray. and then there are the "bad" police, which just go to the corners to kick the shit out of people they don't understand.
for the past decade and a half, the US military has been doing bad world policing, and now nobody trusts us / wants us when actual good assistance can be given. but i mean, this is what you get when you have corrupt and incompetent fucktards running the government and allowing private military industrial machines to profit over loss of life.
i'd imagine the UN / france will strike first, and the US will use this and their positioning in turkey to send a message to both russia and iran at the same time. but if anything goes wrong, man, then watch out. if syria, say with the help of weapons from russia or iran, were able to strike down a stealth fighter and parade the body of the pilots through the streets, then we have a huge, huge problem.
- CygnusZero40
Theyre saying on CNN this is really just to send a message to Assad. The US is going in there to take the country over or obliterate them. Some minor strikes on military installations, possibly even ones that may currently be inoperative to minimize casualties to let him know that we mean business and he needs to stop.
These would be drone strikes, so no bodies are going to be paraded through the streets. Saying "world police" makes it sound like the US just wants to go to war. I seriously dont think Obama WANTS to do this, but I think he feels he just has to. Their people need help. Who is better equipped to help them? That's what it comes down to. We have the means and are in the best position to do this successfully with our technology and resources.
- ukit20
Wow no offense but you guys are coming off as extremely naive.
"This isnt about being the world police. Those people need our help and we're able to help them. It's about doing the right thing. It's only with good intentions to help people who are obviously unable to help themselves."
*tears rolls down cheek
If it was about humanitarianism, don't you think the U.S. would have intervened a long time ago? I'm not claiming to fully understand all the complexities but it's pretty clear there is a struggle going on between the U.S. and its regional allies such as Saudi Arabia on one hand, and Russia/Iran/Syria on the other.
The so-called rebels, which includes radical Islamists and even members of Al-Qaeda, are just pawns in this game. There is no so-called "good police." This is geopolitics and the U.S. doesn't give a shit about chemical weapons, in fact they used chemical weapons themselves on civilians in Iraq less than a decade ago.
- <so much this. Lets fire some cruise missile at them and that'll sort it out.matnz
- I too had the tearseoin
- humanitarianism is the first casualty of politics. well, maybe the third...shit you know what I mean.zenmasterfoo
- ernexbcn0
They have been in war for over 2 years now, and it seems they were waiting for the government to attack with chemical weapons to decide that something needs to be done there.
They got rid of Muammar al-Gaddafi way faster, I guess there were other interests.
- ernexbcn0
http://www.newyorker.com/online/…
Pretty much.
- matnz0
Someone with some sense
- HijoDMaite0
Last update I saw said as early as Thursday strikes could be launched. Cruise missiles from warships and subs in the Med will be used. If Assad is crippled the power vacuum will most likely be filled by the rebels, what then? Elections? Russia and Iran aren't going to go away quietly.
- eoin0
Eternal war... I find it profoundly depressing.
- colin_s0
ukit - re geopolitics and world police -
sure, the US doesn't give a shit, as we could have intervened ages ago. but like everything, the obama administration is playing chess instead of actually being forthright.
and, the US now backed itself into a tough spot when obama made the "red line" comments. so now we HAVE to act, from a geopolitical standpoint.
this isn't so much a standoff with syria as it is with russia and the resources that are left to be claimed. i wish it was humanitarian but, you're right, it's all just politics and positioning. however now obama faces homeland disapproval of intervention, but international eyes are now looking on the US and how they'll play the next move as far as promises made and militarism are concerned.
- colin_s0
it's also about geopositioning (hence why i was talking about chess) - syria as a russian ally is no good to us, but positioned right there with turkey and with such proximity to israel and iraq, if the united states had an asset there instead of an enemy, it improves the threat on iran and also creates a generally dominant territory.
(for "liberty" of course, not "oil")
but since the rebels aren't doing this with any sort of sense of trust in america, again, it just needs to be handled delicately. the US obviously - egypt being proof - has no ability in the middle east to instate trusted rule, and so it's all become about using fractured governments to get what we/they want.