Pentagon Considering Ground Troops in Syria

#26
#26
volfanhill said:
Executive Branch loves to skip that step
Click to expand...

There are different levels of military action. Yes, for all out war, Congress has to declare it. But for an authorization of military action (even with the intent to invade), it can be done by the executive branch. However, the legislative branch can choose to not fund the military action.
 
#28
#28
SergeantVol said:
If you are a foreign policy expert in here raise your hand......











I am waiting..........









Fact of the matter is Counterinsurgency operations have so many different dynamics to consider. Based upon all the operational factors that are in play, a military option may indeed be the best option available. The primary intent in Syria should be the fight against ISIS (regardless of who supports/supported them and the other actors who are agents for instability in the region). Failed states have a habit of spilling over across borders. If the neighbors of said failed states can not provide a secure environment for their state, then the violence and instability will follow into that country. Now you don't have a failed state, you have a regional security issue. Issues with regional stability is a problem for everyone in the international community.

inb4 the Russian apologists say we will attack Russia. inb4 the liberal blame Trump for the issue Obama created. inb4 the libertarians and An-Cap crowd say we should stay out of it because it doesn't directly affect America.


The fact of the matter is that whether or not we want to get involved we have to get involved. Historically speaking, when we have left failed states alone to deal with asymmetric actors, we have dealt with it later (i.e. GWOT). At this point, it doesn't matter if Assad is a bad guy. You can hold states accountable. What is much worse is a group of fanatics that want to destroy the western world, that cant be held accountable. They have no legitimate borders, economy, or assets.

I am a libertarian on most issues minus foreign policy. Isolationism does not work if you are a super power. You have an obligation to ensure peace and tranquility in the international community. The reason being is that it all affects your domestic policy and your economic system if not. Trade partners are affected. Refugees wanting in your borders because of how your country is set up. There are a plethora of different aspects that affect us just in this one situation. Having spent the past 15 1/2 yrs in the intelligence community has taught me a great deal on geopolitics and counterinsurgency theory. I am all for ground troops in Syria so long as we are fighting ISIS. I will volunteer to go, if given the opportunity. The only opinion I will half way respect in here on this issue is YorkVol. He has probably forgotten more than what I know when it comes to intelligence and geopolitics.
Click to expand...

I like my sniper idea better.
 
#29
#29
not a fan. don't want to get involved, don't like we are involved at all. nope nope nope

giphy.gif


do-not-want-reaction-gif.gif


let this be someone else's problem
gif-6.gif


nope.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#31
#31
SergeantVol said:
Yours did sound better. I am trying to look at it from a strategic stand point. I know that nobody wants to get involved. I really don't want us involved but we have to get involved.
Click to expand...

i am fine with this being Russia's mess to deal with. let them get sucked into a land war in Asia.
 
#32
#32
Grand Vol said:
You know, it's an easy fix.

Americans build the best precision rifles on the planet. And have the best marksmen on the planet.

I'd prefer to use our intel to find out where these turds are, drop in some sniper teams and have them dispense some match grade justice. And if their location gets keyed in on? Have a couple of A-10s or AC-130 on call to "assist."

Problem solved and done on the cheap. Match grade ammo? .308? About $1.50 a round. .300 Win Mag? About $2 a round. .338 Lapua? Little more expensive at $6-7 a round. .50 BMG? $6 a round for the good Hornady stuff.

Look on ISIS face when their comrades start dropping and they can't see who's shooting at them? Priceless.
Click to expand...

Basically, I have no problem w/ it....good way to take the fun out of fundamentalist and some folks just need to be killed.

I really don't think the American public cares...it's only 1% who fight anyway....as long as Walmart is open...the average citizen is oblivious.

Better yet, if you really want to do something in this "corner of the world" let the USAF have at it....they need it after being the SE for the past 15ish years....really chaps their @$$ too.

I doubt many can stomach it; Precision airstrikes are a better alternative. Yes, it would cost more....but, once you put boots on the ground it just tends to grow and grow. Plus, no matter how good or careful there will be casulties and once those mount it's either cut bait...ala Clinton or dig in deeper and incur more costs and casualties ala Bush and Obama.

Been there, done that....proud of what we as a military have done, but our ground forces are tired...need a break and this will only mean more years of the young warriors doing back, to back, to back deployments.
 
#34
#34
SergeantVol said:
I love it when you speak on issues that you have no idea about. The bad part is, that you were prior service. You know there was more to the WMD situation than what was reported in the news. My first deployment to Iraq was with the Exploitation Task Force that was charged with searching for the WMDs. Here in 2053, when it becomes declassified, I will tell you the truth.
Click to expand...

No, I don't know that there was more to the WMD situation than has been reported. How could I or anyone else if it's a big secret.

As far is my prior service I was just a grunt. I packed my gear did what I was told. I wouldn't know anything about how classified operations are carried out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#35
#35
also this is putting Russian and American troops in the same theatre of war on semi opposite sides. take all my nopes.

there is already enough issues with limited troops and air support. that gets multiplied by however many more boots we put down over there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#36
#36
SergeantVol said:
I love it when you speak on issues that you have no idea about. The bad part is, that you were prior service. You know there was more to the WMD situation than what was reported in the news. My first deployment to Iraq was with the Exploitation Task Force that was charged with searching for the WMDs. Here in 2053, when it becomes declassified, I will tell you the truth.
Click to expand...

Wow they gave a gypsy a Q clearance.
 
#37
#37
SECDEF ordered COA development. At least we may finally have a contingency plan in Syria. There is really nothing to see here.. CNN blowing way out of proportion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#38
#38
SergeantVol said:
If you are a foreign policy expert in here raise your hand......






I am waiting..........









Fact of the matter is Counterinsurgency operations have so many different dynamics to consider. Based upon all the operational factors that are in play, a military option may indeed be the best option available. The primary intent in Syria should be the fight against ISIS (regardless of who supports/supported them and the other actors who are agents for instability in the region). Failed states have a habit of spilling over across borders. If the neighbors of said failed states can not provide a secure environment for their state, then the violence and instability will follow into that country. Now you don't have a failed state, you have a regional security issue. Issues with regional stability is a problem for everyone in the international community.

inb4 the Russian apologists say we will attack Russia. inb4 the liberal blame Trump for the issue Obama created. inb4 the libertarians and An-Cap crowd say we should stay out of it because it doesn't directly affect America.


The fact of the matter is that whether or not we want to get involved we have to get involved. Historically speaking, when we have left failed states alone to deal with asymmetric actors, we have dealt with it later (i.e. GWOT). At this point, it doesn't matter if Assad is a bad guy. You can hold states accountable. What is much worse is a group of fanatics that want to destroy the western world, that cant be held accountable. They have no legitimate borders, economy, or assets.

I am a libertarian on most issues minus foreign policy. Isolationism does not work if you are a super power. You have an obligation to ensure peace and tranquility in the international community. The reason being is that it all affects your domestic policy and your economic system if not. Trade partners are affected. Refugees wanting in your borders because of how your country is set up. There are a plethora of different aspects that affect us just in this one situation. Having spent the past 15 1/2 yrs in the intelligence community has taught me a great deal on geopolitics and counterinsurgency theory. I am all for ground troops in Syria so long as we are fighting ISIS. I will volunteer to go, if given the opportunity. The only opinion I will half way respect in here on this issue is YorkVol. He has probably forgotten more than what I know when it comes to intelligence and geopolitics.
Click to expand...

Because you served in military intelligence doesn't make your opinion the end all....so we get that straight...

You make good points, but calling people Russian apologist for pointing out obvious flaws or alternative theories to Americans dying in Syria, shows shallowness...

I can assure you that i, along with many others here, could carry a fight to invaders or extremist, if need be...for legitimate reasons. The whole war in the ME has been based on lies...including this...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#39
#39
MT LeConte said:
No, I don't know that there was more to the WMD situation than has been reported. How could I or anyone else if it's a big secret.

As far is my prior service I was just a grunt. I packed my gear did what I was told. I wouldn't know anything about how classified operations are carried out.
Click to expand...

Guess it is different nowadays. I have had the opportunity in many deployments to work with really smart grunts who were dialed into different situations.

Eventually, the truth will come out but by then no one will care anymore.
 
#41
#41
Pacer92 said:
Because you served in military intelligence doesn't make your opinion the end all....so we get that straight...

You make good points, but calling people Russian apologist for pointing out obvious flaws or alternative theories to Americans dying in Syria, shows shallowness...
I can assure you that i, along with many others here, could carry a fight to invaders or extremist, if need be...for legitimate reasons. The whole war in the ME has been based on lies...including this...
Click to expand...

I agree. it doesn't make my opinion the end all. It just means that I am a little more informed. I don't rely on the media for my information. I see the raw truth behind what is going on not what RT, Vice, MSNBC, Fox, or any of the other media outlets want to report. They report half truths with a slant.

As far as Russian Apologists, you do have a track record of tearing down our country and denying that anything Russia does as being wrong. I am not sure how I can take that as anything other then being an apologist. As to alternate COAs of how our involvement in Syria could pan out in terms of Russia, yes I agree that the MDCOA is a proxy war with Russia that leaves thousands dead on both sides. Traditionally though, larger powers have a higher success rate of negotiations when it comes to issues other than territorial sovereignty, which is the case here. Russia's vested interest (for the time being) is to assure the continued rule of Assad unless another option becomes available that is more beneficial for their interests in the region.

Third point, I have no doubt that anyone in here would defend our country should violence reach our shores (with the exception of LG; he would be too busy blaming Trump).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#44
#44
SergeantVol said:
I agree. it doesn't make my opinion the end all. It just means that I am a little more informed. I don't rely on the media for my information. I see the raw truth behind what is going on not what RT, Vice, MSNBC, Fox, or any of the other media outlets want to report. They report half truths with a slant.

As far as Russian Apologists, you do have a track record of tearing down our country and denying that anything Russia does as being wrong. I am not sure how I can take that as anything other then being an apologist. As to alternate COAs of how our involvement in Syria could pan out in terms of Russia, yes I agree that the MDCOA is a proxy war with Russia that leaves thousands dead on both sides. Traditionally though, larger powers have a higher success rate of negotiations when it comes to issues other than territorial sovereignty, which is the case here. Russia's vested interest (for the time being) is to assure the continued rule of Assad unless another option becomes available that is more beneficial for their interests in the region.

Third point, I have no doubt that anyone in here would defend our country should violence reach our shores (with the exception of LG; he would be too busy blaming Trump).
Click to expand...

First off, tearing my country down and questioning it are not synonymous in my opinion...

I have stated before that Russia/Putin are not without flaws. I don't hold them in some high regard. I call a spade a spade...

It can't always be the other person's fault...life teaches us that. It's the same here. As easy and convenient as that sounds...
 
#45
#45
JC61 said:
Basically, I have no problem w/ it....good way to take the fun out of fundamentalist and some folks just need to be killed.

I really don't think the American public cares...it's only 1% who fight anyway....as long as Walmart is open...the average citizen is oblivious.

Better yet, if you really want to do something in this "corner of the world" let the USAF have at it....they need it after being the SE for the past 15ish years....really chaps their @$$ too.

I doubt many can stomach it; Precision airstrikes are a better alternative. Yes, it would cost more....but, once you put boots on the ground it just tends to grow and grow. Plus, no matter how good or careful there will be casulties and once those mount it's either cut bait...ala Clinton or dig in deeper and incur more costs and casualties ala Bush and Obama.

Been there, done that....proud of what we as a military have done, but our ground forces are tired...need a break and this will only mean more years of the young warriors doing back, to back, to back deployments.
Click to expand...

Problem is the USAF and USN have been doing little more than precision strikes. And that's gotten us where?

I'm all about slipping the leash on the SOF forces of this nation and letting them cause some major trouble in that part of the world. And better yet, doing it from afar.

Nothing says "thinking of you" like 168 grains of lead and copper.
 
#46
#46
Pacer92 said:
First off, tearing my country down and questioning it are not synonymous in my opinion...

I have stated before that Russia/Putin are not without flaws. I don't hold them in some high regard. I call a spade a spade...

It can't always be the other person's fault...life teaches us that. It's the same here. As easy and convenient as that sounds...
Click to expand...

I seem to remember your defense of the Russian annexation of Crimea a little differently. If I recall there was an immense amount of shaming the US for supporting Ukraine for wanting to distance themselves from Russia and proclamations of justification for Russia being involved in Crimea and the eastern provinces of Ukraine. I could be confusing you with RAS not sure. If so, I apologize.
 
#48
#48
SergeantVol said:
I seem to remember your defense of the Russian annexation of Crimea a little differently. If I recall there was an immense amount of shaming the US for supporting Ukraine for wanting to distance themselves from Russia and proclamations of justification for Russia being involved in Crimea and the eastern provinces of Ukraine. I could be confusing you with RAS not sure. If so, I apologize.
Click to expand...

They are both birds of a feather.
 
#49
#49
SergeantVol said:
I love it when you speak on issues that you have no idea about. The bad part is, that you were prior service. You know there was more to the WMD situation than what was reported in the news. My first deployment to Iraq was with the Exploitation Task Force that was charged with searching for the WMDs. Here in 2053, when it becomes declassified, I will tell you the truth.
Click to expand...

Every last bit of this has been declassified and most has been unredacted. I have pdf files of the Ted Stevens and Rand Corporation reports. It's ashame I can't post them here.

There was NO sane, moral reason for the Iraq war.

There's NO WAY IN **** a Sgt. had higher access to intel than the select senate intel committee.

Horse****.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#50
#50
SergeantVol said:
I seem to remember your defense of the Russian annexation of Crimea a little differently. If I recall there was an immense amount of shaming the US for supporting Ukraine for wanting to distance themselves from Russia and proclamations of justification for Russia being involved in Crimea and the eastern provinces of Ukraine. I could be confusing you with RAS not sure. If so, I apologize.
Click to expand...

I guess we just see the "support" of Ukraine in a different light. No apology needed....I think Ras and I saw it the same.

We saw the US undermine a democratically elected leader....thus, the country of Ukraine...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top