Questions On The Forthcoming Syria Strike.

No. Not saying anything like that. This war began without our help. We should never be involved especially militarily. That is the first part.

The second part occurs after the President starts flapping his gums and "brandishing threats" at the Syrian government. Once he does that he creates an entirely separate situation with our credibility on the line and his own credibility. His bluff was called and he desperately needed an out. The reason he looks bad no matter what the outcome now is because he looks bad no matter what the outcome now lol. He created this political mess we are in now. It's not me being partisan. The best situation now is that we don't attack, but even that makes him and the United States look pathetic because he opened his mouth and it also elevates Russia.

Do you think people that aren't afraid of an attack from another nation are so easy to capitulate?

You so weak man I'm not afraid of you but I'm willing to make a compromise to get to a point where you won't attack us even though you say it will be small... Assad doesn't want anything to do with an American strike whether it's a small focused strike or not... I mean the guy is even giving interviews to American Journalists trying to appeal to reason and quoting polls from America that show that Americans don't want war in Syria... I mean what kind of dictator gets on television to appeal to a nation by saying their own people don't even want conflict with them lol... Sounds like a guy that's not afraid right...

Idk about that... I mean I think people will be happy that this was solved without the US military getting involved (which still isn't out of the question) they still have to actually get them to hand over all their chemical weapons and to the point where all parties are satisfied with the exchange... Russia is still blocking them a bit too... This situation is still far from over so we'll have to wait and see how it plays out...

Obama - "Don't gas your own people or you'll be sorry"
Syria - "We gassed our own people, what are you gonna do?"
Obama - "Well I can't get support for military action, so just give up your stockpiles."
Syria - "Nope!"
Putin - "Hey guys how about Syria lets Russia oversee the abandonment of the chemical weapons?"
Syria - "Works for me."


Obama To the world - "Look, I fixed it."

I don't know what to tell you if you can't see how that makes us look weak.

I swear Nausi you have a distorted world view lol...

Funny Flavin, I think the same thing of you.

Putin's at it again rubbing it in our face with an OP-ED in today's NYT.

"It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”"

Tell me again how Putin isn't wiping the international stage with Obama?

call me a commie, but what about that isn't true?

Personally my view of you has nothing to do with my own views of Obama or Putin and their actions or positions in this situation but with your complete distortion of the timeline lol...

There's nothing untrue about it. I will say that the US has a long history (1800's) of poor diplomacy and a strong military. Brute force is really the only thing the US has the advantage in right now.

That said, Putin is a KGB thug and war criminal. He ordered people shot for trying to climb the Berlin wall to escape, he organized scorched earth operations in Afghanistan in the 70's, and has sold his country's interests over and over. I watch Russian news, not the Federal stations or the poorly translated op-ed broadcasts targeted at the international community. Putin is viewed by his people and internationally as a mob boss. Russia is hardly the country to be giving us critique on meddling in other country's internal affairs. The breakup of the Soviet Union left most of the outlying countries with essentially no infrastructure or economy which has been exploited by Russian businesses through corrupt governmental policy and kickbacks.

And when the aged and un-maintained arsenal leftover from the USSR is completely depleted (there's a lot of good information on this subject if anyone is curious, as much as half of their nuclear arsenal is completely inoperable at this point, most of their military is operating on 1970's technology) the little weight they actually have internationally will evaporate.

A more accurate conversation would go something like this...

USA - Don't aquire or use gas, it violates international law
Syria - We have gas and we're going to use it
USA - Gassing people will prompt a response
Syria - Someone used gas, it wasn't us
UN - how about we investigate?
Syria - ya sure... Just give us a month or so to hide the evidence
USA - We think it was you and if we find proof, we're going to act
UN - Agreed, let's just find the proof first
Russia - If you act without proof, we'll defend our ally
USA - We have proof
UN - We have proof
Russia - We have a compromise
Syria - But we have conditions
UN - We want to try the participants as war criminals
Russia - No
USA - Good enough

Technically speaking the UN called Russia's bluff. Nobody wanted it to go even this far, but assuming the resolution works, the only people who lost anything are the people who got gassed. (and they faced some of the most horrific conditions imaginable)

Putin is just trying to flex in a moment where he's gotten the US military to stand down on his boy Assad. Or did he? All of the floaty talk about human rights and lecturing America is laughable considering his own actions and the actions of Russia at large. It's like Cheney or Rumsfeld speaking at an anti-war rally or something.

Truth is, if America wanted to start some ***in Syria he'd have to take a few shots of vodka and deal with it. We don't however and for good reason.

It's up to Obama to follow through on these diplomatic negotiations and make sure that Assad legitimately disarms, then we can watch him fight Al-Qaeda fighters along with massacring his own people without worrying about long-term implications to the region.

We still might need to put personnel on the ground to secure and airlift out the weapons though.

did the UN ever actually state they had prove that the Syrian government were the ones that used the chemical weapons? As far as I knew the US were the only ones really hardlining that they had any kind of proof that they did it...

UN - Proof sarin was used.
US - Proof Asssd used sarin.
Russia - We think the rebels used sarin.

The evidence we presented to the UN along with their own investigations was enough to convince the French... They are the ones calling for trials for anyone involved. I don't know if the IN has made an official statement on the matter, but several of the countries generally reluctant of military action have been vocally supportive.

You're not a commie, you're living proof of my point.

objectivity? the horror!

***!

Lol... wasn't your point that Putin is wiping the international stage with Obama? How is Mosin agreeing with part of your statement living proof of that point? One other guy agrees with me! I have deemed him as living proof of my point! yeah...

I agree with most of that statement too and I still don't think that your point rings true in any light... Russia has done the same exact things as we have... hell... many of the actions he's talking about began before Obama was even in office lol... I'm not saying Obama is doing a stellar job by any means but your stance that Putin somehow has the upperhand because he's a hypocrite trying to take shots while he thinks he sees an opportunity is ridiculuous... It does not matter that I am propping up a brutal regime in question with money and weapons because right now America is under the microscope and I will attack them! Ha!

Just saying, Obama screws up the whole Syrian weapons crisis, Putin offers the solution that's ultimately accepted, then writes an OP-ED criticizing the US about the whole thing.

People who sit back and give credit to Putin and his points only codify his authority and dominance over the whole crisis. By agreeing with him, you validate his role as the alpha dog in the whole crisis. Don't worry I agree with him too.

Obama royally screwed this whole thing up.

not speaking to the situation here, as I don't believe Putin / Russia have done any "wiping the floor with Obama"

however, If I had to personally pick a leader to follow into the woods for some strange hypothetical survival trip from hell, I'd rather have an ex-KGB agent who is probably still harder than a coffin nail, than a sissy *** community organizer from the inner-city.

I think a lot of neo-cons like to think in this machismo based , atavistic mentality. (not specifically taking shots at our local, vocal, conservatives)

but this little mental excersize is not applicable to this situation, I must stress.

You can agree with a point Putin makes while criticizing the fact that Putin wrote the op-ed in the first place.

Putin is right that we have chosen military intervention as an almost reflexive response to anything that goes down in the Middle East but I also understand that Putin only says this because he seeks to expand his global influence in an attempt to revive the former glory of the USSR. Putin speaking about God and human rights is laughable and easily dismissed as emotionally charged rhetoric.

If we played isolationist on Syria, we'd be criticized for being weak in allowing Syria to use chemical weapons without a response and now we're trying to use diplomacy and that's considered being weak because we're so used to bullying nations.

So whats the right move here? The halfass limited strikes? Doing nothing? Attacking Syria and declaring another war in the ME? Cmon.

How is Putin the alpha dog here? lol

He's capitulating Syrias chemical weapons in exchange for defusing aggression towards his ally.

good question!

hook up the entire middle east with air conditioning & cable.

people would calm right the f*** down.

I'll bet the costs would be comparable to devestating the entire region militarily for 15 years.

all that matters is who would win in the MMA cage, duh sparth, gawd.

Firstly, I got a really good chuckle out of this. I like how you took the equivalent of a woman being in love with a celebrity because they seem like they'd be good at scrabble, and turned it around a person trying to make a hallow argument.

Second, while I wouldn't want to go one-on-one with Putin in a broken glass eating contest, he doesn't have any kind of upper hand in this situation and he's riding on high of making gay's criminals, outlawing imported cars to prop up their pathetic domestic brands, shifting more monetary responsibility for their space program onto former USSR states while maintaining full budgetary control, etc. The guy has had a lot of "victories" lately and he's trying to sell himself as a leader.

I aim to please!

>.O

The right move just happened, or is happening, and everyone is going to come out looking like winners except for Putin and Nausi, Putin who literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and Nausi because he is still living in a fantasy world where Romney carried Florida and Ohio and won the Presidency.

Obama wins because he doesn't have to strike Syria, which is exactly what the American people were in favor of (not striking Syria). Instead, he threatens it, and spurs the world into taking the action they should have a month ago. America doesn't always have to come up with the the peaceful solution, there are 60 or so other countries that signed the chemical weapons treaty and are responsible for enforcing it.
The other real big winner is John Boehner, whose own party makes up the most worthless group of Representatives to ever sit in the House. He doesn't have to put this very controversial strike resolution, that he has publicly supported, up to a vote, which he probably would have lost, again.
Putin would have looked good for having this peaceful idea (something he had to come up with, after stating he wouldn't intervene in a Syrian strike), a thing he is desperate for, considering he is a terrible leader constantly making bad headlines, but he just had to write a pointless article bashing America. Great job accomplishing nothing there Putin.
Our fleet isn't leaving the region, we can still strike at any time if Assad does something stupid again, which he cannot afford to do, because chances are the world, not even the American public, would be so forgiving after giving him a small reprieve here. Meanwhile, the clock continues to tick down on Assad's reign. And Congress has to go back to work.

ftfy

Are you able to look at anything without a partisan bias? Vic's 100% correct.