Syria is not worth a war with Russia

The United States Navy sent one Guided Missile Destroyer to Syria to get things straightened out. Russia don't stand a chance and the DDG will shoot down MIGs. I pity the folly of the Ruskies.
Just the threat from Russia is enough to deter Washington.

Russia is low tech and America is high tech. Russians are stupid beyond recognition.
It's a big gamble to test that faith.

Hopefully those in the know don't share your bravado.

They certainly seem to be measuring a response.
 
Assad is as reprehensible as a being can be. That he is willing to sacrifice his people just to remain head of state is another disgusting example of the abuse of power. Unfortunately, there have been and are many men like him. Eliminating him would not end that, and might not even end the suffering of the Syrians.
The consequences of major conflict between the U.S. and Russia are enormous. It is something to be considered only in the most dire of situations.
Syria is a horrible mess, but it does not justify what would happen in the event of wide scale conflict between two powers such as America and Russia.
The war drums are beating man...
Same old same old.. Sad. Bigly Sad.
 
Assad is as reprehensible as a being can be. That he is willing to sacrifice his people just to remain head of state is another disgusting example of the abuse of power. Unfortunately, there have been and are many men like him. Eliminating him would not end that, and might not even end the suffering of the Syrians.
The consequences of major conflict between the U.S. and Russia are enormous. It is something to be considered only in the most dire of situations.
Syria is a horrible mess, but it does not justify what would happen in the event of wide scale conflict between two powers such as America and Russia.
------------------------------------ Getting nervous eh 4Eye ??
 

It seems that Sean Hannity is in favor of Trump taking action against Syria but Tucker Carlson is against it. I don't remember ever seeing such a difference of opinions between the two before.
-------------------------------------------------------- i agree with Tucker but will support The TRUMP .
 
no war in the Old World is worth it.


we should declare our neutrality and let them slaughter each other. It's their greatest tradition.
It`s hard to justify our military budget if we`re not blowing up a country now and then.
------------------------------------ military budget should be used for research and development of some real nice weapons and then building and testing of those weapons . Plus building the Border WALL .
 
Syria is not the right place, reason or time for war with Russia, if ever, even, there could be.
 
Assad is as reprehensible as a being can be. That he is willing to sacrifice his people just to remain head of state is another disgusting example of the abuse of power. Unfortunately, there have been and are many men like him. Eliminating him would not end that, and might not even end the suffering of the Syrians.
The consequences of major conflict between the U.S. and Russia are enormous. It is something to be considered only in the most dire of situations.
Syria is a horrible mess, but it does not justify what would happen in the event of wide scale conflict between two powers such as America and Russia.
------------------------------------------------------------- 'syria' can do nothing if USA attacks them . Looking at your 'op' it looks to me that you are concerned with Russia rather than 'syria' 4eye .
 
Syria is not worth a war with Syria.

It is not our problem. We are not the world's policeman.

I agree with you. Though there is a school of thought that we owe the Syrian people, that the civil war was an offshoot of the highly vaunted 'Arab Spring'.

That said - that there will be a 'world policeman' is inevitable. Our only choice is who...US, China, Russia? Distance between countries is no longer an aggression deterring factor. MAD is - but only among those nations with a sense of self preservation. The UN has proved a disappointment in it's peace-keeping efforts.

Winston Churchill wrote a series of books on the Second World War - in the preface of Vol. 1, 'The Gathering Storm', he had this to say...

(an excerpt)
'One day President Roosevelt told me he was asking publicly for suggestions about what the war should be called. I said at once, "The Unnecessary War." There never was a war more easy to stop than that which has just wrecked what was left of the world from the previous struggle. The human tragedy reaches its climax in the fact that after all the exertions and sacrifices of hundreds of millions of people, and of the victories of the Righteous Cause, we have still not found Peace or Security, and that we lie in the grip of even worse perils than those we have surmounted. It is my earnest hope that pondering upon the past may give guidance in days to come, enable a new generation to repair some of the errors of former years and thus govern, in accordance'

...with this as the 'Theme of the Volume" - 'How the English-speaking peoples through their unwisdom, carelessness, and good nature allowed the wicked to rearm.

others from the same volume...

“We shall see how the counsels of prudence and restraint may become the prime agents of mortal danger; how the middle course adopted from desires for safety and a quiet life may be found to lead direct to the bull's-eye of disaster.”
Winston S. Churchill, The Gathering Storm

“If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”
Winston S. Churchill, The Gathering Storm

Much of our foreign involvement since WW ll was based on Churchill's philosophy.

Maybe Syria isn't worth it and yet perhaps Russia is weaker right now than it ever will be. I, in no way, have enough knowledge to choose a course of action. Containment now, or eradication later? Any decision must involve other nations.


Russia will be weaker in the future, and it is by no means certain they will be our enemy in the future. They do not need to be, we have no conflict of interests, as we did with the Nazis or the Soviets.
 
There is little to gain and much to lose in this confrontation.
 
no war in the Old World is worth it.


we should declare our neutrality and let them slaughter each other. It's their greatest tradition.
It`s hard to justify our military budget if we`re not blowing up a country now and then.
we should invade canaduh

most of us know which way to go
If Canada was a poor country full of dark skinned people we would have invaded a long time ago. Unless of course they had the ability to resist.

We haven’t invaded Mexico either, so much for your theory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Russia has aligned with countries that matter in Syria, it's a strong and lasting position.
USA has aligned with terrorists (SDF/PYD/PKK) and bet on the wrong horse.
No matter what Trump does he'll be forced to retreat from Syria in near future as there is nothing to win in Syria for USA.
 
DEFCONWarningSystem on Twitter

upload_2018-4-11_10-45-2.png
 

Forum List

Back
Top