The Red Line: Part Deux

[hog88]

Instead of fighting Iran indirectly we should go ahead and do what nobody wants to do.

And what is that?

 

[Velo Vol]

Had heard that our strikes will be to basically even the playing field which of course will just extend the civil war.

It would require substantial strikes just to do that. You'd have to take out air defenses, air capability, and military installations.

Hard to tip the balance in this civil war without ground forces. And if we aren't changing the trajectory of the conflict, what are we going to accomplish?

 

[82_VOL_83]

1. We don't know where the WMD's are now. We have successfully f'd around long enough that they may not even be in country.
2. Their air support capability would be gone in 1 hour, air defenses in 2, military installations in 24 hours. However, their troops would mobilize and we would be basically bombing sand.
3. We put feet on the ground we are inviting WMD's to be used on our troops. What would Barry do about it when Russia, China, and Iran tell him to back off.

 

[volinbham]

It would require substantial strikes just to do that. You'd have to take out air defenses, air capability, and military installations.

Hard to tip the balance in this civil war without ground forces. And if we aren't changing the trajectory of the conflict, what are we going to accomplish?

Oh I agree - my point was all that we will in effect do is reduce the Assad advantage some and it's not clear how that helps the Syrian people caught in the middle - at least the ones that haven't already left for Iraq.

 

[Gramps]

Oh I agree - my point was all that we will in effect do is reduce the Assad advantage some and it's not clear how that helps the Syrian people caught in the middle - at least the ones that haven't already left for Iraq.

From what I have heard this afternoon all Obama may be doing is hitting Syria hard for a couple of days and stop to send Assad a message to not use chemical weapons on his people. If true, dumb stragedy, imo.

 

[hog88]

from what i have heard this afternoon all obama may be doing is hitting syria hard for a couple of days and stop to send assad a message to not use chemical weapons on his people. If true, dumb president, imo.

fyp

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

Zawahiri to Syrian Rebels: Damascus First, Then Cairo, Then Jerusalem | CNS News

ike the Obama Administration, Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri has taken the side of the rebels in Syria’s civil war.

However, unlike the Obama administration, Zawahiri has been urging the Syrian rebels to follow in the footsteps of the medieval Islamic warriors Nur ad-Din and Salah ad-Din, who in the Twelfth Century consolidated anti-Crusader Muslim power in Damascus and then Cairo, before Salah ad-Din ultimately recaptured Jerusalem from the Crusaders.

Zawahiri made his pitch for Muslim rebels to begin the process of retaking Jerusalem--by first taking Damascus and Cairo--in a videotape that was posted online on Feb. 11, 2012.

 

[Gramps]

fyp

That is true. You could also add " and advisors" .

 

[Velo Vol]

extend the civil war

Here's a blog post arguing that perhaps a stalemate, partially brought on by external force (like Bosnia) might drive the parties to the negotiating table.

I had thought that in the last few months the government had gained the upper hand in the fight. But if the rebels are largely holding ground, then maybe it wouldn't require massive western interference to change the landscape. And conceivably the parties could talk about ending the fighting if the government sees it can't wipe out the opposition.

 

[Gannon Goodson]

We need to stay out of Syria, and that includes missile strikes. It's a civil war; that is, it's none of our business. If anyone wants to go fight that war, sign up and volunteer.

 

[Gramps]

Here's a blog post arguing that perhaps a stalemate, partially brought on by external force (like Bosnia) might drive the parties to the negotiating table.

I had thought that in the last few months the government had gained the upper hand in the fight. But if the rebels are largely holding ground, then maybe it wouldn't require massive western interference to change the landscape. And conceivably the parties could talk about ending the fighting if the government sees it can't wipe out the opposition.

If as reported Al Qaeda is 50% of the rebels, will they sincerely negotiate or be set on taking control of the country or part of it?

 

[hog88]

We need to stay out of Syria, and that includes missile strikes. It's a civil war; that is, it's none of our business. If anyone wants to go fight that war, sign up and volunteer.

Agreed 100%.

We also need to ask ourselves, do we really want Al Qaeda aligned rebels to take over power there? Can anyone see that ending well?

 

[vol4eva]

We need to stay out of Syria, and that includes missile strikes. It's a civil war; that is, it's none of our business. If anyone wants to go fight that war, sign up and volunteer.

The Rwandan genocide was also none of our business, yet that atrocity is viewed as regrettable and an international failure to this day. Doing nothing is essentially a free pass for all dictators to do as they wish.

 

[Obsessed]

The Rwandan genocide was also none of our business, yet that atrocity is viewed as regrettable and an international failure to this day. Doing nothing is essentially a free pass for all dictators to do as they wish.

Yeah. Ours is doing just that.

 

[Gannon Goodson]

The Rwandan genocide was also none of our business, yet that atrocity is viewed as regrettable and an international failure to this day. Doing nothing is essentially a free pass for all dictators to do as they wish.

Then go fight 'em.

 

[hog88]

The Rwandan genocide was also none of our business, yet that atrocity is viewed as regrettable and an international failure to this day. Doing nothing is essentially a free pass for all dictators to do as they wish.

Do you want Al Qaeda taking over Syria? That is what will happen.

 

[vol4eva]

Do you want Al Qaeda taking over Syria? That is what will happen.

Do you want to see another 100, 1,000, 10,000 Syrians gassed to death?

 

[hog88]

Do you want to see another 100, 1,000, 10,000 Syrians gassed to death?

No, but I'd take that over 1 more American being killed.

 

[Burhead]

A+ article by the Onion;

Experts Point To Long, Glorious History Of Successful U.S. Bombing Campaigns | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

 

[82_VOL_83]

Do you want to see another 100, 1,000, 10,000 Syrians gassed to death?

is this multiple choice?

 

[82_VOL_83]

Do you want to see another 100, 1,000, 10,000 Syrians gassed to death?

are there really a 100 billion syrians?

 

[82_VOL_83]

Do you want to see another 100, 1,000, 10,000 Syrians gassed to death?

Just jerking your chain, my opine is in my post above yours.

 

[Velo Vol]

Do you want Al Qaeda taking over Syria? That is what will happen.

Do you want to see another 100, 1,000, 10,000 Syrians gassed to death?

False choices.

Doing nothing is essentially a free pass for all dictators to do as they wish.

But yeah, when we say we're against the usage, or even possession of WMDs, as this president has done, and the last one did, and probably every modern one has done, but then do nothing when a government uses them, it's a problem.

The only twist is that Syria is not part of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

 

[hog88]

False choices.



But yeah, when we say we're against the usage, or even possession of WMDs, as this president has done, and the last one did, and probably every modern one has done, but then do nothing when a government uses them, it's a problem.

The only twist is that Syria is not part of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

No if Assad falls the rebels will turn on each other with the more militant Al Queda backed group likely prevailing.

 

[FLVOL69]

No if Assad falls the rebels will turn on each other with the more militant Al Queda backed group likely prevailing.

That is exactly what Barry wants...ie Libya,Egypt .....