Get involved in Syria: Yes or No? And why/not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. Weve seen this movie before am not interested in another protracted middle east war with ppl who will always despise the US and all we stand for

This. Not one more dead American son or daughter because of the insanity of the Middle East.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but no to troops on the ground. Destroying some Syrian government aircraft and flying capability seems like a reasonable initial approach, from my understandings.

As for the US being the world's policeman/policewoman, I understand that argument, but at the same time we're human beings first, then Americans second (at best).

And the Syrians threatened Israel. And BiBi is NOT happy. And who can blame him?

Now being Israel's policeman, that's more what I have an issue with.

Please. All the other middle-eastern countries are just itching for a reason to kill the Jews, regardless of America's help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but no to troops on the ground. Destroying some Syrian government aircraft and flying capability seems like a reasonable initial approach, from my understandings.

As for the US being the world's policeman/policewoman, I understand that argument, but at the same time we're human beings first, then Americans second (at best).

And the Syrians threatened Israel. And BiBi is NOT happy. And who can blame him?

Now being Israel's policeman, that's more what I have an issue with.

Please. All the other middle-eastern countries are just itching for a reason to kill the Jews, regardless of America's help.

Oh please. Most middle eastern countries do not care about Palestinians. Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel. Jordan lives peacefully next door. The Emirates and Saudi Arabia don't want to do anything which disrupts their relations with the western world. Turkey is clearly not going to attack them. Afghanistan and Pakistan's concerns lie mostly with their domestic situation and to the East, and with Iran. When was the last time you heard Algeria get involved in Palestinian affairs? The Arab League has been proposing peace initiatives since 2002 at least.

What you have in reality is a problem of factions in Lebanon sponsored by Iran, Syria, and the Hamas faction of Palestine.

[Anonymous]

No - we don't have the ability or the authority to police the population of the world. Although this is an atrocity there are equally horrible things happening everyday somewhere in the world.

John McCain's indignation this morning is a complete fabrication. Oil and gold prices have already spiked this morning. This is about creating artificial shortages and driving crude oil prices and peripherals higher.

I used to respect John McCain so much, but since he lost the presidential election in 2008 he has become just another Republican Party hack.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

John McCain's indignation this morning is a complete fabrication. Oil and gold prices have already spiked this morning. This is about creating artificial shortages and driving crude oil prices and peripherals higher

I disagree with his pov, but I think he is sincere.

[Anonymous]

While I can't find words to describe my feelings about what is happening in Syria, we should not move forward. There are no clear partners, we are not (nor were we) going to be greeted as liberators, and we are still enmeshed in Afghanistan, where we squandered the good will by poorly prosecuting that war in order to pivot to Iraq. As much as the pictures of the dead children tear at me, this is not Rwanda 1994.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Weve seen this movie before am not interested in another protracted middle east war with ppl who will always despise the US and all we stand for

This. Not one more dead American son or daughter because of the insanity of the Middle East.

+1

Getting "involved" will not change anything. The innocent will still be dead, whether by chemical weapons or our bombs.

[Anonymous]

Military action in Syria?

Well, Obama should go to congress first. Not that he will.

In Obama's own words,

http://www.salon.com/2011/03/18/libya_2/

Obama: The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+1. Have been hearing from experts about collateral damage, that is, innocent people getting killed.

[Anonymous]

This is going to be a clusterf@ck


An anticipated U.S.-led military attack to punish Syria for using chemical weapons would see American forces, and their allies, launch more than 100 missiles in a blitz lasting up to 48 hours, according to administrative officials.

The U.S. Navy has four destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean Sea positioned within range of targets inside Syria, as well as U.S. warplanes in the region.

In an attack expected within the next 48 hours, missiles would be fired at President Bashar al-Assad's command and control facilities, weapons delivery centers, intelligence bases and military training camps.

The Syrian regime says it will defend itself against a U.S. attack using 'all means possible'

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Syria that his country 'will respond, and respond with force' if Israel is targeted in some sort of counterattack.







http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2403693/Syria-crisis-American-led-forces-cruise-missiles-position-anticipated-blitz-days.html

[Anonymous]

Can someone please tell me what we intend to accomplish with this strike? Is it just "I mean what I say!" from Obama?

[Anonymous]

So you can kill 100k. I am sure there are babies, women, and childern(who cares about the man, right?) in that number. Many more wounded. Now kill a few thousand with gas and hey we have to do something! Because it is morally wrong to kill with gas, but cutting a throat or calling in artillery on a school that's okay.
The response will be a joke. Let's watch on CNN as we blow up empty buildings. We are giving them 48 hours notice and said we will not do any real damage. Why do it at all? Is this deterrence? Washington at its worst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please tell me what we intend to accomplish with this strike? Is it just "I mean what I say!" from Obama?

Yes. He has his balls in a sling. Hopefully, his pride, for once, will not get in his way of common sense.

[Anonymous]

Will another war help or hurt our economy?