We Have No Business in Syria

[Meathead]

The American attack against Syria was an act of political desperation on the part of a failing administration – reckless, unwarranted, and likely illegal, having nothing to do with 'morality.'

How would you know?

 

[Bassman007]

While what happened to those people in Syria is tragic, it is not our fight and never has been. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say our military is to be used as the guardian of the planet and a lot of people in this country are getting sick of it. Aside from Afghanistan, we haven't fought one war in the defense of our nation since WWII. Every other war we have entered into has been a choice to fight someone else's and countless lives have been lost over the years.

Furthermore, we have been interfering in the affairs of the Middle East for over 70 years and all we've done is make things worse. We are responsible for the rise of Khomeini in Iran. We are responsible for the existence of ISIS in Iraq and we will be responsible for which ever radical Muslim extremist takes over Syria if we depose Assad. These people have been slaughtering each other for 5,000 years and we aren't going to change it. All we have had done is made ourselves a terrorist target and watched our civil liberties and Constitutional rights erode as a result.

That depends on whether you believe that morality is restricted to those who immediately effect you. I do understand your point though. I am conflicted.

The American attack against Syria was an act of political desperation on the part of a failing administration – reckless, unwarranted, and likely illegal, having nothing to do with 'morality.'

Syrians who have lived under Assad’s bombs celebrate US missile strike

Get over it, Trump is a HERO in Syria, they want their country back not to be refugees

 

[JoeB131]

Insofar as biological weapons are being used, maintained or propagated in Syria... than yes we do have the "reason" to get involved, especially given our history a few short years ago with Assad's promises to that effect and celebration by the O admin. / Susan Rice to that effect. The distinguishing aspect of biological warfare is that it is extremely mobile, surreptitiously spreading it to any / every corner of this globe relatively easily... The fostering of it's biological / chemical capacity by Syria or Syria/Russia is a justifiable threat to OUR national security on the 'home front'...

First, there's no evidence of biological weapons here.

And the cutting Edge Weapon of 1914 is not worth going to war over.

Look,I hate to use him as a good example, but George W. Bush got international concensus and bipartisan agreement before he went after Saddam. Trump should meet at least that low standard before going forward.

 

[Bassman007]

Insofar as biological weapons are being used, maintained or propagated in Syria... than yes we do have the "reason" to get involved, especially given our history a few short years ago with Assad's promises to that effect and celebration by the O admin. / Susan Rice to that effect. The distinguishing aspect of biological warfare is that it is extremely mobile, surreptitiously spreading it to any / every corner of this globe relatively easily... The fostering of it's biological / chemical capacity by Syria or Syria/Russia is a justifiable threat to OUR national security on the 'home front'...

First, there's no evidence of biological weapons here.

And the cutting Edge Weapon of 1914 is not worth going to war over.

Look,I hate to use him as a good example, but George W. Bush got international concensus and bipartisan agreement before he went after Saddam. Trump should meet at least that low standard before going forward.

No evidence of biological weapons, or chemical weapons that effect biological organisms resulting in biological death. You are either retarded, or you are retarded, though schizophrenia is another option

 

[KeiserC]

Insofar as biological weapons are being used, maintained or propagated in Syria... than yes we do have the "reason" to get involved, especially given our history a few short years ago with Assad's promises to that effect and celebration by the O admin. / Susan Rice to that effect. The distinguishing aspect of biological warfare is that it is extremely mobile, surreptitiously spreading it to any / every corner of this globe relatively easily... The fostering of it's biological / chemical capacity by Syria or Syria/Russia is a justifiable threat to OUR national security on the 'home front'...

First, there's no evidence of biological weapons here.

And the cutting Edge Weapon of 1914 is not worth going to war over.

Look,I hate to use him as a good example, but George W. Bush got international concensus and bipartisan agreement before he went after Saddam. Trump should meet at least that low standard before going forward.

No evidence of biological weapons, or chemical weapons that effect biological organisms resulting in biological death. You are either retarded, or you are retarded, though schizophrenia is another option

We do need independent verification of this latest chemical attack, however, if not Sarin gas it was some other chemical used this past Tu. in Syria...

 

[JoeB131]

No evidence of biological weapons, or chemical weapons that effect biological organisms resulting in biological death. You are either retarded, or you are retarded, though schizophrenia is another option

No, I just know that there is a difference between chemical weapons (Chemicals that cause death when people come in contact with them) and biological weapons (germs that have been bred and weaponized for lethal effect.

There's no evidence the Syrians have biological weapons.

Isn't our problem if they do.

Look, I realize this is bad for you guys. Trump stuck his dick into it, and now he has to either put up or shut up.

But probably better for all concerned if he just shut up.

 

[Bassman007]

Insofar as biological weapons are being used, maintained or propagated in Syria... than yes we do have the "reason" to get involved, especially given our history a few short years ago with Assad's promises to that effect and celebration by the O admin. / Susan Rice to that effect. The distinguishing aspect of biological warfare is that it is extremely mobile, surreptitiously spreading it to any / every corner of this globe relatively easily... The fostering of it's biological / chemical capacity by Syria or Syria/Russia is a justifiable threat to OUR national security on the 'home front'...

First, there's no evidence of biological weapons here.

And the cutting Edge Weapon of 1914 is not worth going to war over.

Look,I hate to use him as a good example, but George W. Bush got international concensus and bipartisan agreement before he went after Saddam. Trump should meet at least that low standard before going forward.

No evidence of biological weapons, or chemical weapons that effect biological organisms resulting in biological death. You are either retarded, or you are retarded, though schizophrenia is another option

We do need independent verification of this latest chemical attack, however, if not Sarin gas it was some other chemical used this past Tu. in Syria...

Supposedly it was Sarin mixed with Chlorine gas which is a WW1 chemical agent, once called mustard gas. If the mustard gas was the active agent then all the modern chemical agents may actually have been already collected. That said mustard gas is basically bleach and ammonia and is readily produced

 

[KeiserC]

Insofar as biological weapons are being used, maintained or propagated in Syria... than yes we do have the "reason" to get involved, especially given our history a few short years ago with Assad's promises to that effect and celebration by the O admin. / Susan Rice to that effect. The distinguishing aspect of biological warfare is that it is extremely mobile, surreptitiously spreading it to any / every corner of this globe relatively easily... The fostering of it's biological / chemical capacity by Syria or Syria/Russia is a justifiable threat to OUR national security on the 'home front'...

First, there's no evidence of biological weapons here.

And the cutting Edge Weapon of 1914 is not worth going to war over.

Look,I hate to use him as a good example, but George W. Bush got international concensus and bipartisan agreement before he went after Saddam. Trump should meet at least that low standard before going forward.

No evidence of biological weapons, or chemical weapons that effect biological organisms resulting in biological death. You are either retarded, or you are retarded, though schizophrenia is another option

We do need independent verification of this latest chemical attack, however, if not Sarin gas it was some other chemical used this past Tu. in Syria...

Supposedly it was Sarin mixed with Chlorine gas which is a WW1 chemical agent, once called mustard gas. If the mustard gas was the active agent then all the modern chemical agents may actually have been already collected. That said mustard gas is basically bleach and ammonia and is readily produced

I'm arguing both sides in my head... I'm basically of the opinion that this was a 'false flag' excuse to send a message. Hens the call to Russia prior to the strike... rather surprising that there was ANY loss of life in the missile strike. The inferred message to the TriComs, to N Korea in particular was the objective here... The WMD argument is admittedly a weak one but it cracks the door enough to send the kind of message that this administration sought to send...

 

[Bassman007]

Insofar as biological weapons are being used, maintained or propagated in Syria... than yes we do have the "reason" to get involved, especially given our history a few short years ago with Assad's promises to that effect and celebration by the O admin. / Susan Rice to that effect. The distinguishing aspect of biological warfare is that it is extremely mobile, surreptitiously spreading it to any / every corner of this globe relatively easily... The fostering of it's biological / chemical capacity by Syria or Syria/Russia is a justifiable threat to OUR national security on the 'home front'...

First, there's no evidence of biological weapons here.

And the cutting Edge Weapon of 1914 is not worth going to war over.

Look,I hate to use him as a good example, but George W. Bush got international concensus and bipartisan agreement before he went after Saddam. Trump should meet at least that low standard before going forward.

No evidence of biological weapons, or chemical weapons that effect biological organisms resulting in biological death. You are either retarded, or you are retarded, though schizophrenia is another option

We do need independent verification of this latest chemical attack, however, if not Sarin gas it was some other chemical used this past Tu. in Syria...

Supposedly it was Sarin mixed with Chlorine gas which is a WW1 chemical agent, once called mustard gas. If the mustard gas was the active agent then all the modern chemical agents may actually have been already collected. That said mustard gas is basically bleach and ammonia and is readily produced

I'm arguing both sides in my head... I'm basically of the opinion that this was a 'false flag' excuse to send a message. Hens the call to Russia prior to the strike... rather surprising that there was ANY loss of life in the missile strike. The inferred message to the TriComs, to N Korea in particular was the objective here... The WMD argument is admittedly a weak one but it cracks the door enough to send the kind of message that this administration sought to send...

Syria has already reactivated the airbase and has resumed flights. They are as much saying that you can not stop us

 

[KeiserC]

First, there's no evidence of biological weapons here.

And the cutting Edge Weapon of 1914 is not worth going to war over.

Look,I hate to use him as a good example, but George W. Bush got international concensus and bipartisan agreement before he went after Saddam. Trump should meet at least that low standard before going forward.

No evidence of biological weapons, or chemical weapons that effect biological organisms resulting in biological death. You are either retarded, or you are retarded, though schizophrenia is another option

We do need independent verification of this latest chemical attack, however, if not Sarin gas it was some other chemical used this past Tu. in Syria...

Supposedly it was Sarin mixed with Chlorine gas which is a WW1 chemical agent, once called mustard gas. If the mustard gas was the active agent then all the modern chemical agents may actually have been already collected. That said mustard gas is basically bleach and ammonia and is readily produced

I'm arguing both sides in my head... I'm basically of the opinion that this was a 'false flag' excuse to send a message. Hens the call to Russia prior to the strike... rather surprising that there was ANY loss of life in the missile strike. The inferred message to the TriComs, to N Korea in particular was the objective here... The WMD argument is admittedly a weak one but it cracks the door enough to send the kind of message that this administration sought to send...

Syria has already reactivated the airbase and has resumed flights. They are as much saying that you can not stop us

That's not really the point... it was a tertiary airfield - "evacuated" in advance... Even if there somehow was no damage whatsoever it would be the same message... The message (I believe) was the ONLY point here. The US linked this particular airfield in the most tentative of terms "false flag" saying that this airfield 'is believed to be' the one used to launch the Tu. chem. strike

 

[Bassman007]

No evidence of biological weapons, or chemical weapons that effect biological organisms resulting in biological death. You are either retarded, or you are retarded, though schizophrenia is another option

We do need independent verification of this latest chemical attack, however, if not Sarin gas it was some other chemical used this past Tu. in Syria...

Supposedly it was Sarin mixed with Chlorine gas which is a WW1 chemical agent, once called mustard gas. If the mustard gas was the active agent then all the modern chemical agents may actually have been already collected. That said mustard gas is basically bleach and ammonia and is readily produced

I'm arguing both sides in my head... I'm basically of the opinion that this was a 'false flag' excuse to send a message. Hens the call to Russia prior to the strike... rather surprising that there was ANY loss of life in the missile strike. The inferred message to the TriComs, to N Korea in particular was the objective here... The WMD argument is admittedly a weak one but it cracks the door enough to send the kind of message that this administration sought to send...

Syria has already reactivated the airbase and has resumed flights. They are as much saying that you can not stop us

That's not really the point... it was a tertiary airfield - "evacuated" in advance... Even if there somehow was no damage whatsoever it would be the same message... The message (I believe) was the ONLY point here. The US linked this particular airfield in the most tentative of terms "false flag" saying that this airfield 'is believed to be' the one used to launch the Tu. chem. strike

The airfield was evacuated because we do not want any Russian deaths which could lead to really bad things, at your seat and mine. Someone needs to ask Putin to his fucking face on camera if he condemns this act and what will he do to stop this from happening again. This would actually allow him to become a man

 

[SavannahMann]

While what happened to those people in Syria is tragic, it is not our fight and never has been. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say our military is to be used as the guardian of the planet and a lot of people in this country are getting sick of it. Aside from Afghanistan, we haven't fought one war in the defense of our nation since WWII. Every other war we have entered into has been a choice to fight someone else's and countless lives have been lost over the years.

Furthermore, we have been interfering in the affairs of the Middle East for over 70 years and all we've done is make things worse. We are responsible for the rise of Khomeini in Iran. We are responsible for the existence of ISIS in Iraq and we will be responsible for which ever radical Muslim extremist takes over Syria if we depose Assad. These people have been slaughtering each other for 5,000 years and we aren't going to change it. All we have had done is made ourselves a terrorist target and watched our civil liberties and Constitutional rights erode as a result.

That depends on whether you believe that morality is restricted to those who immediately effect you. I do understand your point though. I am conflicted.

We are a nation of less than 350 Million on a planet with a population of four billion. We can't make the others play nice.

 

[KeiserC]

While what happened to those people in Syria is tragic, it is not our fight and never has been. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say our military is to be used as the guardian of the planet and a lot of people in this country are getting sick of it. Aside from Afghanistan, we haven't fought one war in the defense of our nation since WWII. Every other war we have entered into has been a choice to fight someone else's and countless lives have been lost over the years.

Furthermore, we have been interfering in the affairs of the Middle East for over 70 years and all we've done is make things worse. We are responsible for the rise of Khomeini in Iran. We are responsible for the existence of ISIS in Iraq and we will be responsible for which ever radical Muslim extremist takes over Syria if we depose Assad. These people have been slaughtering each other for 5,000 years and we aren't going to change it. All we have had done is made ourselves a terrorist target and watched our civil liberties and Constitutional rights erode as a result.

That depends on whether you believe that morality is restricted to those who immediately effect you. I do understand your point though. I am conflicted.

We are a nation of less than 350 Million on a planet with a population of four billion. We can't make the others play nice.

WRONG: The "numbers disparity" holds no water... We can, have, do and will continue to - "make others play nice"... Kind of naive or pie in the sky to think otherwise... Mid 1770's to present should leave no doubt in your mind!

Not surprised... this 'One World Order' 'Globalism' .... United Utopia of Mediocrity crap is being trumpeted in Universities, MSM, establishment Dems & Repubs., NATO and the UN (to mention a few)....

 

[Divine Wind]

Syria is not isolated. The reason Clinton ignored Rwanda was that there was no American interest there. Yet, Syria exports terrorism and Iran is their ally.

Agreed. If the Rwandans were the center of a major export essential to national security such as oil or titanium or if they straddled a major trade route where war would seriously damage the US economy, then it would have been in the interests of the United States to stabilize the situation.

We don't have to wait for enemies to be on our beaches before we act. In fact, foreign terrorists have been attacking us for years, even before 9/11. Bringing the war to them is better than waiting for them to bring the war to us.

A Constitutional Basis for Defense
....Ever since the end of World War II, American power has been the chief deterrent to aggression: the shield under which the tools of diplomacy, trade, and engagement have produced unprecedented progress toward freedom and democracy. But the shield is cracking. America’s global influence is being checked and rolled back, and even the homeland is no longer safe from attack.

The situation can still be recovered, but only if our leaders understand their duty, regain their confidence, and reenergize the defense of freedom here and abroad. Otherwise, the developments that we are witnessing almost daily in Korea, Iran, Russia, China, the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, Africa, and Eastern Europe will be only the leading edge of a terrible storm—the “first foretaste,” as Churchill said after Munich in 1938, “of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year, unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigor, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”

 

[Divine Wind]

While what happened to those people in Syria is tragic, it is not our fight and never has been. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say our military is to be used as the guardian of the planet and a lot of people in this country are getting sick of it. Aside from Afghanistan, we haven't fought one war in the defense of our nation since WWII. Every other war we have entered into has been a choice to fight someone else's and countless lives have been lost over the years.

Furthermore, we have been interfering in the affairs of the Middle East for over 70 years and all we've done is make things worse. We are responsible for the rise of Khomeini in Iran. We are responsible for the existence of ISIS in Iraq and we will be responsible for which ever radical Muslim extremist takes over Syria if we depose Assad. These people have been slaughtering each other for 5,000 years and we aren't going to change it. All we have had done is made ourselves a terrorist target and watched our civil liberties and Constitutional rights erode as a result.

That depends on whether you believe that morality is restricted to those who immediately effect you. I do understand your point though. I am conflicted.

We are a nation of less than 350 Million on a planet with a population of four billion. We can't make the others play nice.

Correct, but we can make them dead.

 

[radical right]

We are a nation of less than 350 Million on a planet with a population of four billion. We can't make the others play nice.

We have the largest military spending by many times over than anybody else on the planet.

List
Rank Country Spending ($ Bn.)
1 United States 596.0
2 China 215.0
3 Saudi Arabia 87.2
4 Russia 66.4

 

[Spare_change]

While what happened to those people in Syria is tragic, it is not our fight and never has been. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say our military is to be used as the guardian of the planet and a lot of people in this country are getting sick of it. Aside from Afghanistan, we haven't fought one war in the defense of our nation since WWII. Every other war we have entered into has been a choice to fight someone else's and countless lives have been lost over the years.

Furthermore, we have been interfering in the affairs of the Middle East for over 70 years and all we've done is make things worse. We are responsible for the rise of Khomeini in Iran. We are responsible for the existence of ISIS in Iraq and we will be responsible for which ever radical Muslim extremist takes over Syria if we depose Assad. These people have been slaughtering each other for 5,000 years and we aren't going to change it. All we have had done is made ourselves a terrorist target and watched our civil liberties and Constitutional rights erode as a result.

You have abdicated your responsibility to humanity.

I hope that makes you ever so proud.

 

[MisterBeale]

. . . and you are wrong, Israel started the shooting.

In April 1967, Syria shot at an Israeli tractor ploughing in the demilitarized zone,

Say what? Who started the shooting?

So a Mossad agent kills some innocent farmer and you just swallow what the cultural elites shove down your throat without question?

Or some nutjob Syrian acting alone does it, and you think it represents Syrian policy? What does Syria gain by a criminal act?



In the end, we look at the results of this act, cui bono?

Try being a bit more intellectually curious.

 

[Divine Wind]

While what happened to those people in Syria is tragic, it is not our fight and never has been. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say our military is to be used as the guardian of the planet and a lot of people in this country are getting sick of it. Aside from Afghanistan, we haven't fought one war in the defense of our nation since WWII. Every other war we have entered into has been a choice to fight someone else's and countless lives have been lost over the years.

Furthermore, we have been interfering in the affairs of the Middle East for over 70 years and all we've done is make things worse. We are responsible for the rise of Khomeini in Iran. We are responsible for the existence of ISIS in Iraq and we will be responsible for which ever radical Muslim extremist takes over Syria if we depose Assad. These people have been slaughtering each other for 5,000 years and we aren't going to change it. All we have had done is made ourselves a terrorist target and watched our civil liberties and Constitutional rights erode as a result.

You have abdicated your responsibility to humanity.

I hope that makes you ever so proud.

Disagreed since there is nothing to stop you from personally participating in programs to help refugees, including sitting on your ass and just sending the Red Cross money.

OTOH, the Constitution of the United States of America clearly delineates the powers of our government. Being the "World Police" or the "World Charity" isn't among those powers. If it is, please quote me where: Constitution of the United States - We the People

 

[Divine Wind]

We are a nation of less than 350 Million on a planet with a population of four billion. We can't make the others play nice.

We have the largest military spending by many times over than anybody else on the planet.

List
Rank Country Spending ($ Bn.)
1 United States 596.0
2 China 215.0
3 Saudi Arabia 87.2
4 Russia 66.4

We also have the most to protect: List of Countries by Projected GDP 2016 - StatisticsTimes.com