The Case AGAINST Syria so far

[Trajan]

so, who up for blowing up some pharmaceutical factories?

the head of the snake gentleman...has to be.


but, how we square that vis a vis Putin et al?

Beats me, but frankly nothing less than that or a full blown, full on, rock the house billion dollar a month uber-no fly zone will do.......half stepping this with some cruise missiles would in affect, be worse than doing nothing as it would be a sign of tentativeness/weakness/lack of seriousness.

The Obama foreign policy is always full tilt tentative/weak/lacking in seriousness.

On the other hand, striking at the war making ability of pinhead Assad by taking out much of the balance of his military infrastructure COULD be seen (by him) as the tip of a spear. If we force him into a choice of (potentially) facing our war-making might with no tools available to him other than his chemical weapons, knowing that we have hazmat type fighting gear, then perhaps he WILL elect to stay his own hand.

I wouldn't love the job of being a military geopolitical adviser to the Obama Administration, frankly.

Or he could decide to use his chems while he still has them and go full bore and spray or bombard every area he considers critical to take back etc...*shrugs*

 

[Katzndogz]

If oil was our interest Assad would be in control right now. It's about increasing the power of obama's muslim allies.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nope

 

[R.C. Christian]

OMG god you retards, it's not about oil. It's about Iran, and then it's about Eurasia. Oh for god sake, wake the fuck up and read a goddamned book before you or your children die over this nonsensical bullshit.

 

[Smilodonfatalis]

The common sense Kerry is touting is common sense according to what has been filtered through the government.

If there was irrefutable and independent evidence that Assad used chemical weapons, it still does not entitle us to interfere with Syria's civil war. Had we never interfered, Assad would have put the rebellion down in a week and all those people would not have died. Now, having caused the deaths of thousands, tens of thousands of people, we will kill a few more and call it humanitarianism. We should never have interfered in the first place.

The U.S. didn't start interfering for many months.

So, as usual, you are full of shit.

 

[Smilodonfatalis]

The common sense Kerry is touting is common sense according to what has been filtered through the government.

If there was irrefutable and independent evidence that Assad used chemical weapons, it still does not entitle us to interfere with Syria's civil war. Had we never interfered, Assad would have put the rebellion down in a week and all those people would not have died. Now, having caused the deaths of thousands, tens of thousands of people, we will kill a few more and call it humanitarianism. We should never have interfered in the first place.

The U.S. didn't start interfering for over 6 months. And the aid has been insignificant.

So, as usual, you are full of shit.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

so, who up for blowing up some pharmaceutical factories?

the head of the snake gentleman...has to be.


but, how we square that vis a vis Putin et al?

Beats me, but frankly nothing less than that or a full blown, full on, rock the house billion dollar a month uber-no fly zone will do.......half stepping this with some cruise missiles would in affect, be worse than doing nothing as it would be a sign of tentativeness/weakness/lack of seriousness.

The Obama foreign policy is always full tilt tentative/weak/lacking in seriousness.

On the other hand, striking at the war making ability of pinhead Assad by taking out much of the balance of his military infrastructure COULD be seen (by him) as the tip of a spear. If we force him into a choice of (potentially) facing our war-making might with no tools available to him other than his chemical weapons, knowing that we have hazmat type fighting gear, then perhaps he WILL elect to stay his own hand.

I wouldn't love the job of being a military geopolitical adviser to the Obama Administration, frankly.

Or he could decide to use his chems while he still has them and go full bore and spray or bombard every area he considers critical to take back etc...*shrugs*

He could just put a bullet in his own brain too. Much faster and less painful -- to him.

**shrugs**

 

[Katzndogz]

The common sense Kerry is touting is common sense according to what has been filtered through the government.

If there was irrefutable and independent evidence that Assad used chemical weapons, it still does not entitle us to interfere with Syria's civil war. Had we never interfered, Assad would have put the rebellion down in a week and all those people would not have died. Now, having caused the deaths of thousands, tens of thousands of people, we will kill a few more and call it humanitarianism. We should never have interfered in the first place.

The U.S. didn't start interfering for over 6 months. And the aid has been insignificant.

So, as usual, you are full of shit.

It did not take that bumbling fool 6 months to say Assad has to go and he would send aid.

If you have not noticed, obama's Syrian debacle is falling apart leaving obama with his thumb up his ass. Maybe he'll let you sniff it.

 

[Missourian]

Whatever the evidence is, flimsy or ironclad, I don't see our interest in getting involved.

Iranian puppet dictator vs. Al Qaeda backed rebels...we don't have a dog in this fight.

Dropping American bombs on this powder-keg will in all likelihood ignite a conflagration that cannot be easily extinguished.

Obama can save face by saying the U.N. released information that clouded the identity of the guilty party, and until that inconsistency is resolved, the U.S. will take no action.

There is no upside to us getting involved.

Europe has bombs and missiles, let them take the lead...it's their turn.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Let's recap a bit.

It does seem to be a strong circumstantial and common sense case that Assad and his hench thugs are responsible for the gas attack on civilians in Syria.

On the other hand, let's assume that's the case.

What the Obambam Administration has failed to make out is how this sad information translates into the proposition that we have any business doing anything about it.

The true questions remain:

What is our national interest in all of this? Is it compelling? If there's a threat, is it or is it not "imminent."

Does Obama HAVE a foreign policy? If so, what the fuck is it?

 

[dilloduck]

One of our most important allies, Saudi Arabia started this mess. I'd like to hear why they think that it's so important that Assad be deposed. I bet they don't give a shit about the WMDs. And Qatar....same thing. Turkey....same thing. We've been tacitly supporting this effort for some time. Why do we know have to increase our level of participation. Is it going to slowly or getting to expensive ?
Lot's of question and Kerry speaking of common sense is the most ludicrous thing I have ever heard.