Syria... To bomb or not to bomb, that is the question.

beth

beth

Administrator
Staff member
Well, GB said no way. So, if we go, we will be doing so without our great ally. I don't think Obama has it in him to go without GB. He'll be up against pissed Russia and China, and have only the French as an ally.
It would be this country's great shame to openly support Al-Qaeda.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
If we removed Assad, it would move the war to the next phase. That phase being FSA vs. Al Qaeda..
Surgical strikes will have no war turning effect if we go forward with that option. Especially since the administration is giving away the targets ahead of time.
Until someone can explain why this conflict is different than other conflicts in the middle east and Northern Africa, we should not intervene. Until it directly affects this countries interests, it isn't our concern.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Well, GB said no way.  So, if we go, we will be doing so without our great ally.  I don't think Obama has it in him to go without GB.  He'll be up against pissed Russia and China, and have only the French ally.  
It would this country's great shame to openly support Al-Qaeda.
Especially since Russia sent Naval ships to the region.....pretty sure our current President doesn't have the balls to challenge Russia.
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
What he's interested in is making his campaign contributors happy by expending a lot of military hardware. It will also have the (very temporary) effect of creating more jobs.
If it was discovered that the CIA set off the chemical weapons I would not be surprised.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
What he's interested in is making his campaign contributors happy by expending a lot of military hardware.  It will also have the (very temporary) effect of creating more jobs.
If it was discovered that the CIA set off the chemical weapons I would not be surprised.
And we all know he is very good at creating temporary/part-time jobs.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/us/politics/obama-syria.html?hp&_r=0
OMG...so we might go in alone with no international support, no U.N. approval? Hmmmm....Irony?
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Obama stuck his foot in his mouth on this one and he's going to have to chew on shoe leather until Assad pushes things far enough the Arab league and UN take a stand, if ever. Unless he lets his arrogance get the best of him he wont do a unilateral strike.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Obama stuck his foot in his mouth on this one and he's going to have to chew on shoe leather until Assad pushes things far enough the Arab league and UN take a stand, if ever. Unless he lets his arrogance get the best of him he wont do a unilateral strike.
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Even Senator pelosi is calling for an attack..............
Darth (Twilight zone) Tang
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
I really hope this is all saber rattling. If he launches an attack his approval rating will dive and he can kiss Democrat control of the Senate goodbye next year. As much as it would help politically from my perspective I really hope he has sense enough not to do it. It would be a monumental foreign policy blunder.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
If the reports are to be believed the Syrian government is moving it's scuds to locations not likely to be hit in any strikes we would make. If 0bama plans to act he needs to STFU and do it.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/320495-obama-cancels-trip-to-la-as-no-votes-on-syria-pile-up
So he will cancel trips to go to war but continues on vacations and trips when it is domestic issues being stonewalled in congress or needing support?
Am I the only one that sees his priorities screwed up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top