IF Assad used chems

H

Horn6721

Hook'em
like hagel has said what should BO, who said use of chemical weapons would cross a red line and be a game changer, do?

I am not advocating anything and I think BO is in a tough spot but he said it
so now waht do WE do? Will the International community agree
 
I wonder where he got those weapons, where did Quadafi(sp) get his?

I wonder why nobody in the Media is pursuing that question? I don't think Libya or Syria have the capabilities to make those weapons and where did they get the ingredients?

Just curious......
 
I think we pursue a strategy similar to that in Libya...air support, increase support to Rebels acting in concert with our allies. I guess the difference here is Russia's backing of Syria? There also seems more concern about radicalism dominating the rebels.
 
the problem with helping the rebels is how many of them are reported ( by CNN USAToday BBC) to be members of Al Q

you know the terrorist group that BO said is decimated?

should we arm them?
 
texas 2000
bow.gif

You walk your talk.
Thank you for your service
flag.gif


What is CBR?

In your opinion what are our options? If Bo hadn't made the red line and game changer pledges I am not sure why using sarin is different than the 70,000 already killed by bullets and bombs that thsi admi has watched die so far.

But he did draw a line
now what does he do?
 
BO rightly buys time and makes sure this was really a chemical attack on the rebels BY order of the Syrian government forces.

Then the tough talk becomes real sticky.

The point is well made that a lot more civilians and rebels have died due to conventional means. From the news reports, it appears to be a small scale attack.
 
newdoc
I agree with you and I think BO is right to say he needs more proof.
I will go further and say I don't think, even after it is proven beyond any doubt that Assad crossed that red line BO stupidly drew, We should do anything more than what we already are.

yes it could be said that BO will lose cred in the world by not following through on his bold ' stands"
but Bo doesn't have much standing in the world anyway
and escalating our involvement in the Syrian confliict would last longer and cost more than any small loss of BO's cred.

let us learn from history PLEASE
 
2000
You point out that in this case BO really doesn't have good options
and I agree

Too bad he made that declaration

but I think he should do what he is doing, keep moving the goal posts. Keep insisting he is investigating
Do NOT escalate support for the rebels. Period

There is no good outcome for us by giving support to the rebels.
On this issue i am happy for BO to back track as far as he can for as long as he can.
 
In Libya it was clear that only superior weapons were keeping Qaddafi in power and it only required Western air power to equalize that advantage. Libya is also more easily accessed from the sea so that support for downed pilots could be facilitated by offshore naval vessels.

Syria is a blood bath that is horrible to witness. It also appears to be a tar pit for foreign intervention. Merely seizing control of the skies (which would likely be riskier in Syria than Libya) may not alter the outcome as easily as it was in Libya.

Too complicated. Too risky. Too bad. Sometimes you have to stay your hand.
 
When both sides are bad, it certainly limits your options. I heard a foreign policy wonk say that two years ago, we might have been able to arm the rebels. But now AQ has a presence among the rebels, and It would be dangerous to arm them now. We may have to just stand back and watch.
 
This might be a stupid question, but why would the use of chemical weapons be such a game-changer? True, it means that he's butchering a lot of people, but he was already doing that. Would it really be that more moral or ethical if he sliced their throats instead of gassing them? What U.S. national interest or even moral issue becomes implicated by him using chemical weapons that wasn't implicated before?

Also, if we go, what's our objective? Do we want Assad out? If so, then how do we avoid Syria turning into Iraq? If we don't want to force him out, then what's the point?
 
mrD
I asked that same question earlier, what about the alleged use of sarin gas is a game changer when there have been over 70,000 killed by bullets and bombs?
It seems an odd 'red line'compared to the reality of the killing already occuring.

It is really interesting since you have both sides accused of using chemical weapons.
Bo is right to keep saying we need to investigate further even though he could appear to be weak to many including radical islamists. I bet Bo now understands the hopey changey approach doesn't work with radicals.

I would think that the sane nations agree with BO and I wish they would say it publically.
 
2000
and you are exactly right that the international community in the form of France and the UK sent a letter to the UN asking for a probe of whethr or not sarin or something similar to sarin may or may not have been used and where it might have ben used if in fact it was. Whew!.
apparently the UK has some soil samples and apparently there was a chemical found in the soil sample that was similar to sarin.
Even the Syrian gov't is calling for the UN to investigate
so apparently now the UN will go to Britain to investigate the soil sample the birts have in Britan.
Cuz it makes NO sense to go to Syria and to where the sarin gas was allegedly used.

Surely neither the Syrian Gov't or the rebels would be stupid enough to use chemical weaons right now so they can just continue killing each other in the old way.
rolleyes.gif
The Link
 
So the liberal response to where Syria and Libya received their WMD comes from a 1995 article from some publication called Wisconsin Project?

I think it is just a big coincidence that a country that had used chemical weapons in the 1980's, and then their were none in the 1990's or 2000's, you don't find that strange?

Multiple country intelligence agencies said they had them and then they didn't? Then countries known for your traditional terrioism all of a sudden start showing up to have these weapons?

I just find that real coincidental............sorry for stating the obvious..........
 
Even though BO in his presser is backpedalling and has hagel doing back flips I still think we do nothing.

BO has already damaged the USA with his red line drama so I don't think the countries that hate can laugh too much harder or that they will ramp up whatever they are doing anymore than they already are.
I totally agree with this act of ineptness; send not ONE supply to the rebels, not one dollar of aid to the rebels. NO noflyzone and for God's or Allah's sake Not one boot on the ground.
.
Just keep insisting you need more proof.
 
Syria seems to have ratcheted up their means of violence just slowly enough to keep everyone on the sidelines. The reasoning for waiting has predominantly been 'well X is only a little worse than last week, so we'll let it go'. It is right to draw a red line. We should stall action until we have proof that it was indeed the regime and then let that stew in the international realm for a bit to make it evident that we are not eager to engage in this civil war. BUT, if we have evidence that this was a deliberate use of chemical weapons we should certainly take out as much of the military infrastructure as we can....and then back away and let the Syrians do the rest for themselves.

Breaking stuff(their military) is easy. rebuilding a nation that is in internal conflict...nearly impossible. Lybia hasn't gone as we hoped but it is better than leaving the bastard in place, and we aren't engaged in another nation buildig effort. It's certainly not ideal but given the alternatives, it is probably our best play.
 
BI
There is according to many reports radical islamist involvement within the syrian rebels, even al Q

WHY would we send weapons to alQ or any radical islamists? Did we learn nothing?
 
Bismarck said of the Balkans that the whole of them was not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier. MY thoughts on the middle east if you substitute marines for the grenadiers.

Let the ******** kill each other.
 
Guis
I am with you on this. Specifically Assad's murders killing radical islamists and vice versus.We know radicals are being sent into syria to help the rebels who at one time might have been fighting for real humanitarian reasons and who might have even been worth our aid.
Now
let them kill each other
The only problem of course is how to protect the really innocent
. That is not something we can do now

NOT one cent , not one gun and not one inch of nofly to protect.
Please let us learn from history, even Benghazi which was a ' long time ago"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top