Syria and chem weapons

Posted by: MacBozo

Syria and chem weapons - 08/26/13 04:25 PM

So, all the media is hyped up over this (they should be) and reporting that the President is "weighing his options" about how to respond.

BS!

When he stated the red line ultimatum, scenarios and plans were already made by him, the DoD, and the Pentagon. It isn't a question of what, but one of when.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/26/13 07:45 PM


From what I understand
they're still trying to make CERTAIN
exactly "WHO put the Tribbles in the Quadrotriticale!"

SOMEBODY sure wants to mix us up in another war and
~ in my humble opinion ~ it just doesn't make sense that
The Syrians (ANY of them) would ever have crossed said
"red-line" lest it bring the Wrath of God down upon them.

Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/26/13 08:21 PM

Unfortunately Barry may have committed himself by drawing a line (however amorphous) in the first place. At this point, he may have to do *something* regardless of the perpetrators. I know he really, REALLY doesn't want anything to do with this mess (and rightly so), so we'll have to see how measured is his response.

He's a smart guy -- let's hope those smarts help in this case ...
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/26/13 10:09 PM

Waiting for the UN inspectors to verify with certainty. Obama will be cautious and make sure he has allies support when the sh!t begins. Israel is going to be weighing in with force.

I am really hoping that whatever happens ….. happens slowly. My daughter is in Tel Aviv today, Jerusalem later this week and returning next Monday.
Posted by: steveg

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/27/13 03:12 AM

Maybe she could bomb Iran while she's in the 'hood? crazy

In other much more important news:
• Impeach Obama
• Miley Cyrus has a tush

sick

Hope your kid gets out-a there before the feces strikes the rotary impeller blades.
Posted by: musicalmarv7

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/27/13 03:36 AM

The good old Republicans would love us to enter another war we do not need. Good old John M. at it again with the rest of the hawks backing him up.No way Jose!
Posted by: DLC

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/27/13 11:25 AM

NOT much he can do that'll make any difference now.

I'd suggest confer with Allies... IF they don't kick in, DO NOT pull a GW - " go it alone"... another Iraq quagmire BS. Plus WTF is he going to do IF Russia or Iran decide to step in and back Azzhole ! ??
He'd just dig a deeper hole.

IF several allies concur and agree to a policy and response, it might be worth considering... but not likely.
Proceed with extreme caution !!! eek
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/27/13 01:21 PM


Knowing exactly who
twisted his arm into
agreeing to a Red-Line
coincidentaly involving
the chemical in question
would be a good start, no?
Posted by: MrB

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/27/13 01:46 PM

I'm don't give a crap who people want to blame. Demos will blame Repubs, and Repubs will blame demos, but we need to just stay the hell outa Syria.

We don't need a mother freaking war. Sis shiit we haven't gotten out of the last two we started.

Dave
Posted by: MrB

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/27/13 01:49 PM

But we don't "confer" with allies. That's not what we've done in the past. We strong arm our allies into doing our bidding.

Dave
Posted by: John Rougeux

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/27/13 07:23 PM

I agree, we need to stay out of Syria. Who cares what he said in the past if there was a red line or what, we need to stay out.
Posted by: musicalmarv7

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/28/13 03:57 AM

I agree 100% with you. We have enough problems at home to deal with now.
Posted by: DLC

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/28/13 10:29 AM

GW isn't president, BO is. I think he'll be a lot smarter. I agree I don't want any MF war. But if there's truly a multinational effort, we should support it in some way. That's a far cry from boots on the ground as McCain wants. And our support must have limits $ wise. W already broke the bank with his 2 wars, and economic collapse! mad
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/28/13 08:14 PM

This isn't news Dave. Miley Cyrus is news. Repeat MILEY CYRUS. HANNAH MONTANA. Get with the program.
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/28/13 08:16 PM

I definitely don't want American boots on the ground, or even American planes and missiles. Let Europe handle it this time. Then we can pat THEM on the back, and talk shyte about them afterwards. I am not saying something shouldn't be done, I just think it's finally time for the US to take a back seat and see what others can do for a change.
Posted by: musicalmarv7

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 03:23 AM

Cyrus is just a tramp period. No morality at all.
Posted by: musicalmarv7

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 03:25 AM

You are right. We cannot be baby sitters for everyone who is in trouble in wherever they are in the world especially in the Middle East.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 07:42 AM

Syria needs to take care of her own business. But, just thinking now, we do need to publicly discus it otherwise others will think we care more about what our singers do or if how Diana died or whether Christie is too fat instead of Foriegn affairs.

Dave
Posted by: DLC

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 07:45 AM

Agreed - I just hope BO sees it that way and decides to walk away or do a token measure to "check the box". It's VERY risky with no payoff, and 90% of a "no win" or lose situation. I feel for the Syrian civilians but we cannot afford to be the World's policeman... there are dozens of brutal dictators around the world, we can't even afford to take 1 on ! Wish W had realized that... his 2 wars really put us in a box !! What a dumb fokker !! mad
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 09:06 AM

I think the use of chemical weapons is the game changer. If the US & allies turn the other cheek it shows those extremists that the use of these weapons empowers them. If Syrian government uses them on their own people wihout consequence then where's the deterent to use them again and again and against others?

An extremist with a cache of nerve gas or biologics is a different thing than an extremist with a dozen RPGs, a thousand machetes or a suicide vest or car trunk full of conventional explosives.

Not saying the US alone needs to be the world's policeman, saying that the US and the rest of the modern world (hopefully someday including Russia and China) are all in this together.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 05:56 PM


Funny..
..I don't recall hearing the OUTRAGE when Ronald DUMSFELD
supplied the SAME Chemical Agent to SoDam Insane...
...nor when Paul Wolfowitz supplied the excuse for the Iraq War...


What I'm reading from our former allies is:
"WHAT? MORE WMDs? --- Give Us A Break!" smirk


In DUHbya's own words;
"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice,
.......er.......we won't get fooled again!"


..and just for the record..
As of today, China joined Russia (and Iran)
to come together in defense of Syria. blush -oopsey
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 06:05 PM

.
.
____________
Sage Advice


.
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 06:28 PM

Neither can we embolden those other dictators by standing idly by.
Posted by: DLC

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 07:07 PM

I agree BUT we can't afford to go it alone- Brits said NO, expect the French andGermans to do the same. IF we did anything alone, we'd be bluffing (we're exhausted $ and people wise**) and they know it. And the Syrians would either repeat the incident = poke in the eye, OR get Russia or Iran involved and we'd be trumped any way. Because of the 10 yr old BS in Iraq and Afghanistan, we cannot afford to do anything that would make a significant difference. **GW 'shot our wad' 10 years ago !! that really boxed us in for future threats. Sorry that's a sad reality.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 07:31 PM


and I can only assume that the British "pulling-out"
includes the ENTIRE BRITISH EMPIRE?
Australia & Canada?

not a very good start

yeah,
The PinHead twisting PM Tony Blair's arm into joining
the LAST "Coalition of the Willing" left the same
nasty taste in Great Britain's collective mouths.


Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/29/13 07:38 PM

Originally Posted By: DLC
I agree BUT we can't afford to go it alone


I believe without any hesitation that Israel and the US will find solidarity in any action against Syria.

And Russia and China already support Iran and I bet they know that Syria isn't the endgame, a non-nuclear Iran is.

Obama has no options here. Congress will politicize any action, and CNN is already prepping the Super 3D graphics to show how things blow up. Already the progressive left and the rightwing wackos are acting like drama queens as if bombing has already occured. Teapartiers and Rightwing radio is calling Obama weak and a war monger … doing their best to blur history (as only they can do) and pin all of Bush's Iraq bullsh!t as Obama's recent actions ….

… and if the worst happens and we do end up in a military conflict with Syria, Republicans will certainly think it's still the right thing to do to shut the government and default on the debt limit just to pour gasoline on the fire.
Posted by: steveg

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 03:06 AM

Obama has one option. And that is to collectively blow away Syria, Iran, China, and Russia in one nuclear orgy. No perps left. No whiners left. Problem solved. And we and Israel can go to the movies.

This. Whole. Thing. Sucks. mad
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 04:08 AM

For once I agree with those on the right, who will hate Obama no matter what. We should not go in. I grieve for the Syrian people, but it will only create more horribleness in the near and far flung future. Why the right was so for Iraq and so against Syria, I don't know but..
Posted by: musicalmarv7

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 04:43 AM

War is costly and to many lives are lost.
Posted by: Mike

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 06:57 AM

Originally Posted By: steveg
Obama has one option. And that is to collectively blow away Syria, Iran, China, and Russia in one nuclear orgy. No perps left. No whiners left. Problem solved. And we and Israel can go to the movies.

This. Whole. Thing. Sucks. mad


This should have been done years ago!
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 08:24 AM

Originally Posted By: lanovami
For once I agree with those on the right, who will hate Obama no matter what. We should not go in. I grieve for the Syrian people, but it will only create more horribleness in the near and far flung future. Why the right was so for Iraq and so against Syria, I don't know but..


I tend to think that if you're in a situation with no good options, you should probably go with the not-good option that doesn't involve killing people. I'm also wondering -- since Barry obviously really, really doesn't want to go in militarily -- why he doesn't go to Congress for approval. Seemed to get Cameron off the hook (although the press is playing that as some sort of great defeat for Cameron, I think it's what he was secretly wanting all along) ...
Posted by: DLC

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 09:32 AM

Agreed 6-er. We need to take a hypocratic oath- do NO harm ! Barring Steve's choice, I see only 1 option ...walk away. The American people are war-weary and doubtful - I only wish they'd been that way in 2002-3 !!

I wish BO would go to the Congress and get the same answer as Cameron. Then maybe he'd say "never mind" or "the people have spoken!" ! This could be the biggest mistake of his Presidency if he goes it alone. AND I'm afraid if Israel gets involved, that'll really prompt Russia and Iran to jump in and there we go .... another costly FUBAR war !! or he'll (we'll) look like fools !!

I hope in the media discussions that follow, it is pointed out how quickly we can find resources and $ for wars that are NONE of our business, but NOT to fix our own "home front" or help people who are hurting. Gawd that drives me nutz !! mad
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 09:50 AM

I agree Obama needs to go to Congress first …. otherwise we'll be in a military conflict with Syria, the debt ceiling default will cause global economic havoc, the US government will be shut down …. and The House will be solely consumed with impeachment proceedings.

I heard one report that Obama asked Boeher yesterday about bringing the House back early to confer on the Syria action and Boehner said no. The GOP House wasn't interested in Libya either, only talk of impeachment because the POTUS first told leadership he would, and then acted.

I don't believe there will be a strike on Libya. I think there will be a demand for UN Peacekeepers and increased leverage on Putin to stop his sh!t. Then all the GOP fake peaceniks can stop their charade and start their neocon screaming again that Obama is weak...
Posted by: steveg

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 11:02 AM

Right. That way we could have had three prolonged wars going at once. crazy
Posted by: MrB

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 11:38 AM

This sure looks familiar

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/...t-humanity?lite

President trying to do a psychological number on the American People

Dave
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 12:04 PM

Yep. Just like Bush he released the public intelligence briefing ….
The US intelligence actually documented the specific rocket launches. The UN found precise evidence of the chemical weapons. Just like Bush. Fake aluminum tubes versus 400 horribly dead children and 1000 horribly dead adults from those same rocket launches… familiar?

Kerry was to the point that these were NOT the same.

Looks familiar exactly how? is there a "Curveball" here? Is Haliburton already receiving no bid contracts before a missle is fired?

Looks familiar exactly how? Like Kosovo? Like Hussein's attack on the Kurds, the sarin attack Reagan was good with?

I heard Kerry specifically say negotiations and diplomacy were the first step. Just like Bush?

I am against any armed conflict, I'm against any involvement or escalation in another country's civil war, but I am more against a humanitarian crisis caused by a dictator using chemical weapons against innocents.



http://www.scribd.com/doc/164269962/U-S-Syria-Intelligence-Assessment
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 12:28 PM

An on the other side of things, my daughter is in Jerusalem today. That's 135 miles from Damascus. That's 15 minutes for a missile to be lobbed into Israel. So I'm am at this moment, as a parent, feeling like I have some skin in the game. I'm thinking long and hard about the consequence of a sarin filled missile landing in Israel. And I have the exact same feeling about those sarin filled missles in the Aug. 21 attack in the Ghouta area outside Damascus.

Posted by: Celandine

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 01:58 PM


More "skin in the game" than people's sons
..excuse me... "boots-on-the-ground" getting
ready to shed their blood in this BS conflict?

Tell her to get on a plane and come home...now!
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 02:29 PM

I agree. Take it to Congress, if they say no - tell the UN it's their move.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 02:45 PM

If one just hears the word. We have the state dept broadcasting to the people convincing them that we need to take arms to a Foriegn nation. That's what I say is familiar cause it is. I realize this community wants to support this president and wouldn't have agreed with Bush no matter. I didn't support Bush and I'm questioning this one.

But the rhetoric is the same.

I just hope that Obama doesn't kill too many innocent children, to use Kerry's words


Dave
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 02:54 PM

I don't need a lecture about other people's son's going to war. I'm not advocating going to war.
The way people are talking about Syria being in a bubble, and if chemical weapons are used there to kill people in a civil war it is no concern or involvement of the US & allies.

My daughter flies home on Monday, and we've talked about the situation. My point was that proximity to chaos changes one's outlook. Israelis live with this every day. From a TV screen or a website we personally have no proximity.

No one has talked boots on the ground, Obama and Kerry specifically said just the opposite. I don't believe either have said a word about any specific action, yet everyone is acting like we've already unleased Shock & Awe v.2 and we're rolling tanks into Baghdad Damascus.

Did Kerry say diplomacy & negotiations first? or did I just imagine that?


I said earlier (with a typo)
Quote:
I don't believe there will be a strike on Libya Syria. I think there will be a demand for UN Peacekeepers and increased leverage on Putin to stop his sh!t.


Just this last Monday weren't all the news reports saying the US would bombing Syria on Thursday (yesterday)?

Over on Democratic Underground there are threads like "Syrian chemical attack killed 1,429 so we will kill 200,000 in response." This is like FoxNation or FreeRepublic … everyone hates Obama for the war in Syria we seem to have already started.


Posted by: DLC

An alternative action ???? - 08/30/13 03:24 PM

Well we look pretty stupid... we complain of Syria using chemical weapons, but didn't say shiite about Iraq under Hussein using them back in 1988... but that was a GOP President & future President !

But I heard some commentary and my position hasn't changed BUT IF we HAD to do something (i.e he continues to use chemical weapons), would this work ? IF BOs purpose is to prevent future use of chemical weapons (he said it was today), would this be a deterrent? Fact: Syria gets >$350 million / month from its oil exports and refinery products (2010 data). Syria uses this $ to buy many (much) of its military stockpiles including chemical weapons from Russia.

One fear is IF we strike, will Assad be compelled to retaliate and repeat the offense to thumb his nose at us (likely if it were military targets only) ? Could we hit him a little and hold the rest over his head to prevent further attacks? Could we hit any chemical weapons depots/ manufacturing places and even missile batteries used to deliver those weapons (if we could be certain where they were - if not, DON'T), AND as a deterrent, take out 1/4 to 1/3 of his oil refineries & depots? Warn him- if he uses chemicals again, we'll take another 1/4 - 1/3 of his refineries and oil facilities, etc... That hits Syria in the pocket book, takes away $ spent for military goods, and sends a clear message.

This would #1 show we're serious, #2 we keep our word (no blinking), AND #3 establishes a deterrent that we could enforce. At first, the financial pain would be significant, but not too great; however with the threat of it getting much worse every time he used them.

I full well realize he could be illogical and use them again in spite of anything we do, but he'll lose something for it. If he repeats again, he loses more income. Now at the end 3-4 strikes, he has no refineries depots to lose, BUT he's $350 million / month more in debt to operate his military and regime. This is compounded on the other sanctions hurting their economy.

What do you think ? NOT saying I'd recommend it BUT if I was 'hell bent' on doing something- this sounds more logical and more limited plus has a chance to be a deterrent (against chemical weapons use only). I think hitting military targets does not.

What I'm really hoping for is BO goes to Congress and they say NO, and he respects that message. (kind of "I've been over ruled !') . . . BUT I'm not holding my breath !! sick

Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 03:37 PM

I don't think Obama should attack Syria. At the same time, I am just completely sick of the way in which every daµned thing becomes so intensely politicized that you can't think clearly about policy issues--period. Case in point: the republicans who, if Obama were Bush, would be demanding immediate action, are now demanding that Obama abrogate the War Powers Act (a horrible law--don't misunderstand me!) and act only with congressional permission; and the democrats who, if Obama were Bush, would be demanding congressional permission, are now demanding that Obama act without congressional ok.

Give. Me. A. Break.

Stuff like this should not be a political volleyball game. So although I recognize what the republicans are doing, for once I agree with them. Presidents can fight wars, but only with congressional approval. That's the Constitution, and that should be the practice. But that hasn't been the case since the end of WW II, and that horrible War Powers Act is a way of giving the appearance of legality to something that is completely illegal.

So no attack on Syria--and let Congress say so!
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 03:54 PM

The ironic thing for me is people seem quite divided on whether we should go in or not - and it cuts across ideological lines. I have plenty of lib-Dem friends who are divided on this, and plenty of con-GOP friends who are divided.
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 04:00 PM

Gary's foreign policy advice on Syria:

1. Arrange one-on-one diplomatic meeting with Putin prior to the G20 Summit next week. Get Putin on the right side of history. Use the economic summit to leverage Putin's decision. Let Putin be a hero …. who gives a f*ck but Putin.

2. Use G20 Summit to show solidarity against Assad.

3. Engage UN Peacekeepers to monitor Assad's stockpiles and violations. Containment and verification, because he's not going to give them up.

4. Keep US and Allied forces in position to protect the UN Peacekeepers & inspections.

5. Let Syria decide the outcome of their leadership without threat of Assad's chemical weapons and Putin's influence. Once Assad is out, contained WMD stockpile does not fall into control of someone worse than Assad. <repeat this step as often as needed>

6. Let House GOP hold meaningless vote to condemn Obama for his actions.

Posted by: lanovami

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/30/13 06:27 PM

A good plan. 6 will surely happen (ir)regardless.
Posted by: musicalmarv7

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 05:55 AM

This situation will never get better with Syria.
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 11:02 AM

So Obama is a smart cookie. Two decisions, he says. First, military intervention is necessary. Second, Congress needs to vote to approve it.

I disagree with the first point. I agree entirely with the second one.
Posted by: Acumowchek

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 12:03 PM

On the verge of another war, but we have to wait for congress to return from recess on Sept.9. One might think this was important enough to return early. crazy

Close the playground. Everybody out of the pool. Get back to work. Recess is over.
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 12:31 PM

Yes, a good move on Barry's part. It will be interesting now the ball is in Congress' court to see if they do come back early or decide the "crisis" isn't really important enough ...

Meanwhile, Obama wins politically -- no matter how Congress votes he has cover to either stay out if Congress votes no, or to go ahead if they vote yes. The only way he loses is if they vote no and he goes in anyway (which would be really tough to justify given Cameron's response to the "no" vote in Parliament) ...

This could be a really positive step in the right direction after the Executive's generally playing fast-and-loose with war powers post-WWII ...
Posted by: DLC

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 01:20 PM

PHEW !! eek

I thought Barry was gonna pull a "W" Fock-Up !!
Glad he's going to Congress so the R-W talking heads can now shut up about it !! grin
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 01:25 PM

Obama lets Assad stare down the barrel of a gun for a while. Bad cop.
Obama lets Congress do their job and decide for the nation. Good cop.

Well played.
Posted by: steveg

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 04:25 PM

Ya gotta wonder if this was his strategy from the git-go. If it was, he's played Congress — especially the House Repugnican caucus like a cheap harmonica!
Posted by: garyW

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 04:40 PM

Originally Posted By: steveg
Ya gotta wonder if this was his strategy from the git-go. If it was, he's played Congress — especially the House Repugnican caucus like a cheap harmonica!




Posted by: DLC

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 08/31/13 08:20 PM

Originally Posted By: steveg
Ya gotta wonder if this was his strategy from the git-go. If it was, he's played Congress — especially the House Repugnican caucus like a cheap harmonica!

IS that, Lay Lady Lay or Don't get Fooled Again, I hear ? wink

Posted by: steveg

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 09/01/13 03:07 AM

laugh Oh shˇt! really is gonna be the new tag line for the GOP. Or maybe they can just change the acronym to GOSP. laugh
Posted by: MrB

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 09/01/13 04:07 PM

Originally Posted By: Acumowchek
On the verge of another war, but we have to wait for congress to return from recess on Sept.9. One might think this was important enough to return early. crazy

Close the playground. Everybody out of the pool. Get back to work. Recess is over.


Unbelievable, isn't it. Must be tough on those congressmen to have to come back to work early, as if they work much anyway. How many of us routinely worked on our off days. As a teacher, I know I did. Many other professions do also.

You would think our going to war would be important enough.

Dave.
Posted by: DLC

Re: Syria and chem weapons - 09/02/13 07:50 AM

I think they want to give the news talkin' heads more days of business with all the BS speculation.
Yeah we wouldn't want Congress to WORK like a common Joe !! WTH would happen to this country.!! mad

I think the voters need a "red button" to push ... if they 're really fed up with Congress have a special vote - UP or DOWN... if it's passed, ALL Congressmen are purged (including your own) !! . . AND They can't run again for at least 2 years ! Maybe Congress might be a little more serious and careful.