Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 22      1   2   3   4   Next   »
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,292
Reply with quote  #1 
This should be a thing, right? What with Obama and Co. beating the war drums over WMD.

It's interesting that the admin is rattling swords on Syria but not a peep about his pals in Muslim Brotherhood instigating genocide (religicide?) against Christians in Egypt.

Some links on the way:

Yahoo from October: Romney wants war!
http://news.yahoo.com/biden-romney-wants-war-syria-iran-172932280--election.html

The Atlantic: ROMNEY IS THE WAR CANDIDATE!
http://m.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/10/why-romney-is-the-war-candidate-contd/264207/

Biden says ROMNEY READY TO LAUNCH WAR!
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/247131-biden-romney-wants-war-with-syria-and-iran

CBS, attacks Romney, excuses Obama failure to act
http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?pageType=politics&catid=57479455&feed_id=3&videofeed=39

Foreign Policy finds some Senators to attack Romney
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/07/24/top_senators_can_t_explain_romney_s_syria_policy

USA, on an Obama ad that attacks Romney on Syria
http://m.usatoday.com/article/news/1619795

And here's a tweet from the OFA Reuth Team: (talk about misnomers, eh?)
Apparently they didn't bother looking at a map! Lol

Romney says Syria is Iran’s “route to the sea,” but Iran already borders seas and doesn’t share a border with Syria: OFA.BO/agx12A


mikec

Registered:
Posts: 8,985
Reply with quote  #2 
Having a hard time understanding what we are going to do at this point.

It will be interesting, however, to watch the liberals on this one.  They have decried incessantly the other wars going on, so it will be interesting to see if they cheerlead this one or not.

Where is Hillary?  Isn't she supposed to be issuing a policy position a week or something?

I can't see that lobbing a few cruise missiles into Syria gets us much, and a ground war seems out of the question.

Our ridiculous incoherent policy is paying its dividends.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 12,109
Reply with quote  #3 
Obama's biggest problem is that he drew a line in the sand with no expectation that it would be crossed.  Now, he's boxed himself into a corner.  I really don't want us involved in yet another Middle East conflict.  We need to get back to defining what our interests in the region are and acting accordingly.  In Egypt it's easy - we don't want the Muslim Brotherhood in power and we need to make sure the Suez Canal is not endangered.  In Libya, we simply need to not let the deaths of 4 Americans be in vain.  We need to find justice.  In Iran, we can't let the Mullahs get a nuclear weapon and we must stand with Israel to prevent it.   In Syria, we've allowed mass murders to occur but why is it in our best interest to step in?  I don't know.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.
TheHammer

Registered:
Posts: 11,135
Reply with quote  #4 
just figure how much money the armament companies will be making by us sending missiles in that country.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 27,208
Reply with quote  #5 
yep, If China and Russia don't care, why should we?
__________________
"Getting your motor revved about taking our guns is going to be what undoes your efforts."

"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,292
Reply with quote  #6 
Where is Hilary indeed? Kerry has been on the job a few months, this situation in Suria is as much on Hilary as it is on the unicorn chasing community organizer who sleeps in the White House.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 12,109
Reply with quote  #7 
FIB - I'm not a big Kerry fan but I do feel for the guy as Hillary has left him several turds in the punchbowl.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,422
Reply with quote  #8 
Please tell me what each one of you want Obama to do with regards to Syria.  This way, I'll know if the eventual criticism is warranted or not.  It's way above my pay-grade, I voted for Obama, so I'm going to trust in what he decides.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 12,109
Reply with quote  #9 
Dewey - I already admitted I don't know what to do.  How about you tell us what you would do before Obama decides to see if you can actually take a stand on something instead of just following your master?
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,422
Reply with quote  #10 
I just told you I have no idea what we should do so I wouldn't begin to criticize his decision.  How about you?  In any event, I don't think I've been too vague on most of my other positions.
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #11 
Hammer - I am as economically cynical as you are.  Every administration has to decide which god to worship and who benefits from the fallout.   Frank
PS - Remember in the 80's when the Reagan administration supported Saddam Hussein's regime against Iran when they knew damned well that Hussain would use chemical warfare, and sure enough he did, and then against the Kurds with tremendous casualties.  Now in Syria chemical warfare is a moral no no. Depends on whose ox is being gored and to whose benefit!!!!!  Was it in colonialism that sovereign states lost the right to determine their own destinies?    

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #12 
The problem is obama's buddies are the MB and they have walked all over he and hillary in the ME.  And, I dont know that Obama realizes that yet.  Some select drone attacks, maybe a special troops mission, but definitely no real troops on the ground etc... With his lead from behind and thug mentality we dont need any more soldiers dieing because he's clueless on foreign policy.
__________________
Susan
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,292
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabar61
FIB - I'm not a big Kerry fan but I do feel for the guy as Hillary has left him several turds in the punchbowl.


Nothing but turds, really.
We'll come to find that Kerry and Samantha Powers have more spine than the rest of the admin combined. If Kerry can pull off a new peace deal with Israel and ME he 'should be' the Dem nominee in 2016, provided other things don't go haywire. (Obama will want credit for a peace deal, but everyone already knows that's Kerry's baby). Kerry in WH far preferable to Clinton.
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #14 
Oh Fib, dont give me nightmares.  Scarey to think of either one of those guys in office, especially after 8 yrs of crap under Obama.
__________________
Susan
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,292
Reply with quote  #15 
Three things: what Obama should do; what he will probably do; what worries me (all subject to change, btw)

1) what he should do is nothing.
-The red line nonsense is the worst possible reason to get involved. It was a hugely stupid thing to say, everyone knows it, but acting on it would only compound the stupidity.
- there should be some recourse against Assad for using CW, but it doesn't have to come from the US.
-the rebels just received 400 tons of weapons. For reference, they got about 27 tons prior to the key battle for Quysar a few months ago. That wasn't enough to hold the city vs fresh and well equipped Hezbollah, but they were able to fall back and regroup, and are now holding their own up in Aleppo. The 400 tons of new weapons should shift the tide in their favor
- Saudi Prince Bandar, former Amb. To US, has stepped back onto the stage after an extended absence. It's no secret the Saudi's really want Assad gone. Bandar is hugely influential and will further shift the tide against Assad, with a bonus that he, wirh the CIA, will influence which groups come out on top. Which hopefully will enable stability sooner rather than later.

2) what Obama will probably do is a limited action in conjunction with various partners.
- the coalition is formed, main Western are players US, UK, France, maybe Germany; numerous lesser players, some with conflicting regional interests but they all want Assad gone. (KSA, Jordan, Turkey, lesser EU nations
-likely targets are air defense, air force (or no fly zone at minimum, but they will almost certainly the airports), ammunition and supply storage, military communications, and maybe the homes of Assad and his family
- the CW stockpiles are far trickier, and will take boots on the ground, but likely rebels, and I'm guessing some "contractors" which is code for CIA, SEALS, etc, but unidentifiable as US Forces, just in case
- Israel should, and will, sit this one out.
- Russian FM Lavrov went on record today saying they aren't getting into a shooting war over this. Basically, Putin in agreement that CW use should be discouraged so will step back while we slap Assad's wrist

3) what worries me is the timing, and why Assad would use CW here at all. There's no logic in it. But there are potentially a lot of players involved, and things could escalate and get really hairy, really really fast. I call this the Brer Rabbit scenario, basically a trap, and where this might end I have no idea. But the Ayatollah and Putin have been playing in the big leagues for a long time, much longer than Obama and his feckless dealings to date. If Israel gets dragged in, look out because Netanyahu will come out with all barrels blazing. The good news is that Putin has a really good life, and realistically has nothing to gain by a WW3 scenario, so even if the Ayatollah gets crazy, there would be a brake.

This third scenario is unlikely, but you can bet the Pentagon and our allies will be planning around the clock, just in case.

There is already talk of sometime next week to get things rolling, which probably means Thursday or Friday, and leaves plenty of time for diplomacy. Cough cough. The US though should get in, get out, tilt the balance a bit, and let Bandar and his crew clean things up. Because getting Iran out of there is a whole new deal, and should be regionally contained, at least until we can elect a real President.

PS The other reason Obama will take the risk here is that he needs a popularity boost at home, and will likely ride down Pennsylvania Avenue in a roman chariot as the conquering hero if things go well.

keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 27,208
Reply with quote  #16 
Put me down for nothing, let his buddies at the UN direct all action vs. Syria.  He better not deploy troops.
__________________
"Getting your motor revved about taking our guns is going to be what undoes your efforts."

"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 8,985
Reply with quote  #17 
FIB - you captured my thoughts exactly
bhblue

Registered:
Posts: 2,161
Reply with quote  #18 

We need to stay out of the Syria business. 

1)  Picking the right side in these conflicts hasn't historically been a US strong point. 

2)  While there is little doubt that chemical weapons have been used in Syria, are we absolutely sure they were used by the government of Syria?  With UN inspectors already on the ground, why would Assad use them?  I certainly can see why the rebels would want it to appear as though the government had done this and definitely wouldn't put it past them to gas their own lines.

3)  How can we be so outraged at civilian casualties when our drones have been killing and wounding civilians collaterally for years?  I support the drone program, BTW.

Unfortunately, I think we will get involved militarily.  Too many leaders from both sides in Washington look to be in favor of it and I believe they picked what side to support over a year ago.  I think there may be more to cover up in Benghazi than mistakes made in saving our people.  There sure were a lot of CIA people there and some rumors about funneling weapons from Libya to the Syrian rebels.

ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,292
Reply with quote  #19 
The last time the US tangled with Syria was early 80's, here is how it happened:

http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2012/02/13/when-america-attacked-syria/
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 27,208
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
I just told you I have no idea what we should do so I wouldn't begin to criticize his decision.  How about you?  In any event, I don't think I've been too vague on most of my other positions.


Why wont you begin to criticize what his indecision has produced? We have surely read your criticisms about Bush's unwanted wars. You have an opinion on anything else. Why can't you come out and say what you think he should do?

__________________
"Getting your motor revved about taking our guns is going to be what undoes your efforts."

"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,292
Reply with quote  #21 
The "Room for Debate" in NYT today has 8 different opinions on Syria, much food for thought here, read as many from the sidebar as you can (if interested, of course)

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/08/26/is-an-attack-on-syria-justified/type-of-weapons-assad-uses-shouldnt-affect-us-policy
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 12,109
Reply with quote  #22 
KIR - forget it.  As a matter of policy, Dewey does not criticize Obama.  It matters not what his true opinions are - it's a debate strategy.  He's made that clear.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 12,109
Reply with quote  #23 
Also - Dewey's other policy is when confronted with factual evidence, question the factual evidence.  Just like the abortionists, he's afraid if he gives an inch, he'll start to lose the war.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,422
Reply with quote  #24 
Obama's decision to date has been to refrain from attacking Syria and to provide some arms to the Rebels.  What indecision are we referring to?  I say if intelligence can identify where stockpiles of chemical weapons may be stored, a strike to take them out is likely in order.  I think this is what will happen and I'm OK with that.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 12,109
Reply with quote  #25 
I agree that a strike on known stockpiles might make sense.  The problem though is that Russia and China are now telling the US to do nothing but Syria already crossed Obama's red line.  This is why he has now boxed himself in.  He either goes back on his red line promise or he further complicates the already terrible relations he's created with Russia and China.  The US president should not be in this position but he created it himself by creating the red line a year ago.  There was no need to do that and it obviously had no effect.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 12,109
Reply with quote  #26 
This certainly complicates matters.

http://freebeacon.com/iranian-official-israel-to-be-first-victim-of-u-s-attack-on-syria/


__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #27 
Pabar - It had to come to this at some point.  Middle Eastern diplomacy is a game of "I dare ya" and USA's ties to Israel render USA vulnerable in that "game".  It is not as simple as do we use military force or not. "You go ahead and knock this chip off my shoulder, and I'll punch the hell out of your little brother, and it will be your fault".     Frank

PS - The United States cannot afford a "red line". 

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 12,109
Reply with quote  #28 
Frank - Agreed that the US cannot afford a red line.  So why did Obama draw one?
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,292
Reply with quote  #29 
On the red line, it wasn't in Obama's prepared remarks for that day. It hadn't been discussed in meetings etc. Obama made it up on the fly, thinking it was an off the cuff remark with no real consequence. That or he thought he John Wayne maybe. Not thought through, and a hard lesson in what it means to be President of the US. You can say stupid things in community meetings, in Chicago planning commission meetings, and to some extent even in the Senate. It's example of the position being much greater than the man holding it.

WH staff tried to downplay it, but it's one of those things that once its been said, it doesn't easily go away. So to the rest of the world, dumb nuts Obama put not just his own credibility on the line, but America's credibility at stake. The guy is a rank amateur.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,422
Reply with quote  #30 
one        two


ahhhhh
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.