War in Syria: Yea or Nay

Post Reply New Topic

Things are going pretty well on this. A UN resolution passed requiring that Syria disarm (WMD). They say it might be doable by next summer. And it also includes language to push for a peace deal. That still leaves Assad in power for now though. It's up to anti-Assad forces to provide enough weapons to force a solution where Assad goes to live in Russia.

Assad staying in power for a while longer thus means nothing really got fixed.

What are you going to do when Al Qaeda takes over Syria?

Honestly? Cluster-bombs, or a five second choking nerve gas! Take your pick! Who gives a crap! Getting blown to kingdom come is way worse!

You believe in Al Qaeda now? I thought you were one of those, "bin laden didnt do it" guys. Al Qaeda is always sniffing around these things. Yet they didnt take over Libya, Tunisia or Egypt.

Whatever anyone thinks of Assad, the situation is volatile and getting the WMD out, if it works, is a good idea for us and the region. If Obama can also negotiate a nuke deal with Iran, that would be quite a coup for his legacy. We'll see.

We are doing what we did with Afganistan and Russia. We supported the Taliban, in Lybia we supported the Muslim Brotherhood. In Iran, Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khomeini, who we should have overthrown instead of Lybia, Egypt, and now Syria. The people there loved America, now those people are all dead.
And btw, would you rather be blown to shite by a cluster bomb, or humanely killed in 5 seconds by Sarin gas? Who gives!

Gas is a horrible way to go. You can watch the videos on you tube if you havent seen them. And Assad has worse than Sarin. He has VX, Pretty much the worst chemical weapon available. The world is concerned for a reason. Even if you can't see it.

Doesn't anyone else find it funny (or seriously disturbing for that matter) that the american government always calls for the disarming of nuclear capabilities of other countries, but is primarily the only government that ever threatens to use such technology? Or that the american government also has this capability and, like other governments, refuses to disarm?

American Government = Hypocrite it seems.

Not railing on the government (this time), I'm just saying that this should be just as much a concern as any other country, simply because it's an ultimate power that (admittedly) has worked to decieve it's people in so many ways it's not even funny. Considering the lengths that the american government goes to for it's own agenda, can such an administration even be trusted with the wellfare of it's own people, let alone the rest of the world? I think not.

This isn't Libya, Tunisia, or Egypt. This is Syria and the primary fighting force of the rebels are aligned with Al Qaeda. The 'moderate' part of the Syrian opposition is the Muslim Brotherhood. There are tens of thousands of foreign combatants in Syria and they're not leaving any time soon. They are literally the same insurgents that have been murdering American soldiers and untold amounts of Iraqis the last 10 years.

The region will be volatile until the end of time, I don't understand how people feel it is so important for Assad to give up his WMD's but ignore the fact that Israel has hundreds of nukes and chemical weapons of their own that they threaten the rest of the world with(look up the Samson Option) Bibi Netanyahu is actually oming to America to try to set Obama straight on Iran's "sweet talk" which I can only assume is him arguing for us to go to war against Iran, Israel lobbied hard for war with Syria too. They do not want peace, they do not want diplomacy to work, they will not compromise, they threaten the security of the world more than some tin pot dictator ever will. They want to continue to dominate their neighbors and to operate as an apartheid state in perpetuity.

Yep, and it is a lot worse than a cluster bomb on a bunch of civilians. Yeah what could it possibly be like? If it is worse than burning to death or electrocution, than I am completely baffled. Like burning to death or electrocution is better...

The immediate difference is that Syria used them, obviously. Even China signed on to the vote rather than just abstaining as usual.

Tell the Palestinians that Israel hasn't used them. The reason Syria has so much chemical weapons is to as a counterweight to the vast Israeli arsenal of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Israel joins Burma, Egypt, North Korea, Angola, and South Sudan as the only states not to ratify the CWC.

Israel came close to being pushed into the sea by their neighbors in 1973. And again, they havent used them. But I tell you what, next time Israel nukes a rally of protesters I'll say something.

Syria attacked Israel in 1948.
Syria tried to deprive Israel of fresh water in 1964 (which, in my book, is basically equivalent to an attack), a key event leading to the six-day-war in 1967.
Syria attacked Israel in 1973.

If Syria would just leave Israel alone, perhaps they wouldn't need to have a "counterweight" at all...

I've never understood the depravity of war.
Man against man.
Man defeating man.
Shouldn't I just have tea with this man to understand his reasoning?
Perhaps sit near a fireside and watch the game together?
What are all these metals for?
So I could point it to your heart in some grotesque trajectory?
Paint your green fields red with your blood to ear myself a badge of courage?
I don't know you and you don't know me.
Yet, I've been sent here to end you.
If that makes sense then send me fields of unicorns and fairies with which to frolic.
I fear that I may die with you, and I fear I won't know why.

War brings out the true morals and courage of men and women.