We are going to war with Syria

Still no war. Thank goodness. Can the Russians "work" with their ally Syria to "clean up" this situation? Can the US pressure Russia enough for them to do so?

I heard this only from my girlfriend, so forgive me if my facts are off a bit. But Kerry supposedly made a faux pas in his speech which opened the door to the US not attacking Syria. Something about Obama's words being rhetoric. Supposedly the White House was peeved about this. Again, I think this is more show then reality. Obama does not want in on Syria. He drew his "red line" and yet is still looking for every out he can on the matter. Can only hope a alternative solution can be found. And can only hope that that solution also involves no further chemical weapons attacks.

Lost in all of this is Putin said he would sell Iran the S 300 missile defense system. Which would change the Israel game forever.

We are not putting any boots on the ground.
Obama has stayed out of this conflict for two years for a reason.
Nobody likes watching the next Rwanda play out but there are large numbers of al Qaeda fighters in Syria fighting Assad. Al Nusrah and Al Qaeda in the Levant are very effective anti Assad forces and they fight hand in hand with free Syrian army units sometimes.
Hezbollah has entered into the fray, at least 10,000 Hezbollah fighters fought for assa at the battle of Qusayir. Hezbollah is Irans proxie.
Al qaeda affiliates have begun bombing Hezbollah neighborhoods in Lebanon, they are also attacking Kurdish towns in northern Syria.
Obama drew a red line that was easy for Assads to avoid.
Yet Assad clearly used chemical weapons in two attacks.
We still are not sending any troops, we were on the verge of bombing some of Assads assets until Kerry floated the idea of Syria giving up their chemical weapons.
This is a big deal, Syria actually jumped at the idea and is now handing over the 6th largest stockpile of chemical weapons in the world.
Let me say this again. We aren't sending any troops into Syria.

The only reason we have been offering support to anti Assad forces that are not linked to al Qaeda is because it's a geopolitical blow to Russia. Some of you seem to forget that Russia. Iran and china to a lesser extent are HELPING ASSAD murder a hundred thousand people indiscriminately.
Russia lost 5 billion in weapons contracts when Ghaddafi died.
If Assad goes, so goes another 8 billion, Russia's oil supply and Russia's only naval port in the area.

However if John McCain or Mitt Romney were running the country, well things would be different we would be going to war with Syria .

We invaded Iraq on the pretext that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, that saddam Hussein had links to al Qaeda and that saddam Hussein had purchased aluminum tubes from Niger.

All three turned out to be false.

10 years later saddams next door neighbor has clearly used chemical weapons on his own capital.
The overwhelming majority of the country wants to do nothing.
Bush's fiasco in Iraq had many damning consequences and this is one of them.

We now know saddam destroyed his own WMDS after Clinton's Desert Fox strike and the economic sanctions. Assad knew any air strike from the US could greatly shift the balance in the civil war. That's why he's going to give the weapons up, he can afford to if it keeps us out of it.
The slaughter will continue as this Sunni Shiite civil war spreads to turkey and Lebanon

oggy420 wrote:

Who couldn't see this coming? Iran you're next. Unconstitutional undeclared war here we come yet again to save the day. Truly unbelievable...

oggy420 wrote:

this will be the start of WW3

To start this thread, Oggy made 3 bold predictions. Going to war with Syria. Going to war with Iran. and WWIII. Pretty sure the Syria prediction(and possibly the WWIII) goes back at least a year. Yet still no war. And Oggy has been quiet as the US has zig zagged it's way out of direct intervention.

Oggy where are you? Are you man enough to admit that you have been wrong regarding US going to war with Syria, then Iran, and the start of WWIII?

oggy420 wrote:

Is Obama the President … or the “Concluder”?

More than 150 Congress Members Demand Vote on Syria

 

Washington’s Blog
August 30, 2013


Politico notes:


Already Thursday, more than 150 members of Congress have signaled their opposition to airstrikes on Syria without a congressional vote. House members circulated two separate letters circulated that were sent to the White House demanding a congressional role before military action takes place. One, authored by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.), has more than 150 signatures from Democrats and Republicans. Another, started by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), is signed by 53 Democrats, though many of them also signed Rigell’s letter.

Quite a few Congress members have pointed out that launching a war without Congressional approval is unconstitutional.

Britain – which didn’t pass the Constitution – let its Parliament decide.

Congressman Amash said today:


After the vote, Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) tweeted that such a motion “would fail in Congress, too.” He later tweeted: “UK Parliament votes on going to war. Congress votes on critical things, too, like renaming post offices.”

The American people are as opposed to a strike on Syria as the Brits.

But in the same way that Bush called himself the “Decider”,  Obama is now acting like the “Concluder” regarding war with Syria.

Indeed, Obama – like Bush – has proven that he’s not very interested in following the Constitution.








IMO whether or not Obama let's congress vote whether or not to strike determines whether we now have an authoritarian government where the executive branch thinks they are above the constitution, or whether there is still some resemblance, some hope, that this is still a constitutional republic, or democracy since so many people assume that is what we have.

So we are good right? At least a little bit?

Birdofthad wrote:

We are not putting any boots on the ground.
Obama has stayed out of this conflict for two years for a reason.
Nobody likes watching the next Rwanda play out but...

However if John McCain or Mitt Romney were running the country, well things would be different we would be going to war with Syria .

you mean like your boy clinton?

its official you would go full gay for our president

Cu Bu wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

We are not putting any boots on the ground.
Obama has stayed out of this conflict for two years for a reason.
Nobody likes watching the next Rwanda play out but...

However if John McCain or Mitt Romney were running the country, well things would be different we would be going to war with Syria .

you mean like your boy clinton?

its official you would go full gay for our president

I think Bird is saying that Obama is watching another Rwanda. He's staying out. He might say he wants in, but he, thus far, has stayed out.

Obama tried to launch a war with Syria, if he had gotten his way we would be at war right now.

he tried to start a war with Syria which has backfired because of no congressional support, no senate support, the English backed out, the American people where completely against it, and it also came out the he is directly arming and funding extremist groups like Al-Nursa and the leader of Russia made him look like a complete fool by coming to a peaceful, diplomatic solution to the mess.



yet people are acting like Obama saved us from war. Yes, why don't we just give him another peace prize.... fuck it just give him 10 more. Apparently the guy cant do anything wrong and is the savior of the free world...

Cu Bu wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

We are not putting any boots on the ground.
Obama has stayed out of this conflict for two years for a reason.
Nobody likes watching the next Rwanda play out but...

However if John McCain or Mitt Romney were running the country, well things would be different we would be going to war with Syria .

you mean like your boy clinton?

its official you would go full gay for our president

Clinton admits Rwanda is his biggest regret.
He still stopped a Christian on Muslim genocide, attempted to kill Bin Laden (republicans called that wag the dog at the time), and bombed and sanctioned Saddam Hussein into destroying his own WMDs.
Let's not even mention 24 million jobs and a surplus. But perhaps the biggest thing Cliton did, was draw up battle plans after the USS Cole bombing ( literally months before he left office). He also created the first ever counter terrorism cabinet position with Dick Clarke in the position.
Condi Rice demoted Clarke and Bush didn't hold one meeting on Bin Laden for his first 9 months in office, instead he took a record number of vacation days.

oggy420 wrote:

Obama tried to launch a war with Syria, if he had gotten his way we would be at war right now.

he tried to start a war with Syria which has backfired because of no congressional support, no senate support, the English backed out, the American people where completely against it, and it also came out the he is directly arming and funding extremist groups like Al-Nursa and the leader of Russia made him look like a complete fool by coming to a peaceful, diplomatic solution to the mess.



yet people are acting like Obama saved us from war. Yes, why don't we just give him another peace prize.... fuck it just give him 10 more. Apparently the guy cant do anything wrong and is the savior of the free world...

Dude can you really not see that the generals and hawks like McCain have been wanting boots on the ground In syria for the past 2 years
Hell McCain went there himself. You ar being delusional because you don't want to admit your wrong. If Obama wanted to invade Syria he could have the precedent is already there.
We invaded a country on the pretext the had WMDs . Assads regime has used them. Obama still wasn't talking about ground troops.
Just kinetic strikes which will not change the balance in the civil war
Obama put the task to congress and then Syria offere to give up an Enermous amount of VX gas they had been denying they had for te past 25 years.


This is a big deal

Oggy how did Obama try to start a war with Syria
A secrterian civil war is happenening in Syria and has been for the last 2 years.
At least 100,000 are dead, Assad is shelling and bombin civilian neighborhoods in major cities, al Qaeda is there fighting against Assad, Hezbollah is there fighting for Assad.
All Obama asked was that Assad not use his chemical weapon stockpiles.
Assads regime has used them on at least 2 occasions now. The largest one being in his own capital.
Obama did not invade not ask to invade, he asked to use kinetic strikes.
He put it to congress like he was suppose to.
Then he didn't even do those strikes.

So I ask you
How in the fuck did Obama try to start a war with Syria.
He set the easiest red line not to break ("hey Assad just don't  gas em") an Assad broke it twice.
You should be happy you have a president that isn't cumming in his pants to the idea of a massive ground invasion in the middle of a sectarian civil war ( we learned how that goes in Iraq 2004-2007)

Thanks for proving your ignorance Oggy
Obama is not directly funding al nusra , the Abdullah azzam brigade or any other fundamentalist group in Syria (Shiite or sunni)
We fund several people in the Syrian national coalition (not even the whole group) who then gives what little aid we are giving them to non Islamist elements in the free Syrian army.
Guess what oggy they give nothing to al nusrah, al nusrah killed the leader of the SNC two months ago.

captain organic wrote:

Cu Bu wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

We are not putting any boots on the ground.
Obama has stayed out of this conflict for two years for a reason.
Nobody likes watching the next Rwanda play out but...

However if John McCain or Mitt Romney were running the country, well things would be different we would be going to war with Syria .

you mean like your boy clinton?

its official you would go full gay for our president

I think Bird is saying that Obama is watching another Rwanda.  He's staying out.   He might say he wants in, but he, thus far, has stayed out.    

You nailed it captain

To be fair, Obama put pressure David Cameron to circumvent the proper British procedure and push through a quicky vote on Syria. Cameron wanted to do it as well but the House of Commons voted against it. I'm not convinced that's the conduct of a man who didn't want to go to war.

re the earlier comment about McCain/Romney, I doubt they'd want to go to war, they'd much prefer to undercut the Russians to supply the Syrians with arms  

Major New Polls: Americans Are Sick of War

Washington’s Blog
September 27, 2013

A new CBS News/New York Times poll shows :


More Americans disapprove than approve of how Mr. Obama is handling relations with Iran.



Americans overwhelmingly favor (82 percent) the deal reached between the U.S. and Russia for Syria to turn over its chemical weapons.

Americans still would not support airstrikes against the Syrian government, even if Syria fails to comply — an option that the U.S. says remains on the table if the diplomatic solution ultimately fails.


Underlying these views, a large majority (68 percent) continues to believe in principle that the U.S. doesn’t have a responsibility to do something about the fighting in Syria. As was the case earlier this month, majorities of Democrats and Republicans don’t view this as a U.S. responsibility, and there has been little shift in the public’s views about this in recent weeks, or over the longer term.


The president’s rating on foreign policy overall is more negative than in July, before the escalation of U.S. involvement in the Syria crisis. Just 40 percent approve of his handling of foreign policy, while 49 percent disapprove – the highest disapproval he has ever received on this measure.

An Economist/YouTube poll shows that – by a margin of 49% to 25% – Americans think that Putin has been a more effective leader than Obama on Syria:


Even more stunning, when the question – who was the least effective leader on Syria – was asked, Obama was voted least effective … even less effective than Syrian leader Assad:


It’s not because Americans particularly like Russian or Arab leaders. Rather, it’s because Americans want to avoid another war. The Syrian leader agreed to give up his chemical weapons, and the Russian leader brokered the deal. Obama, on the other hand, wanted war, and was dragged kicking and screaming to the negotiating table.

A September 2012 poll conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs showed overwhelming opposition to the idea of attacking Iran among American voters, with 70 percent saying they are opposed to the idea of a unilateral US attack on Iran. And that was before the new moderate Iranian leader started negotiating a nuclear deal.

The truth is that Americans have been sick and tired of war in the Middle East for years.

September 26, 2013

Fox News is reporting a stunning theft of U.S. arms by jihadist salafists in Libya. This news item will be made much of by critics of Obama on the right. However, military and government blunders, cost overruns, unneeded weapons systems, and general mis-management are par for the course.

Of more relevance is the light this sheds on the U.S. arms being shipped into Syria. There have already been detailed press reports that there really are no significant controls that prevent these arms from reaching the most terror-prone and jihadist elements among the Syrian rebels, whose numbers are large in proportion to all the rebels. This decision to ship arms was foolhardy from the get-go, and now in light of the Libyan theft it looks even more ill-conceived.

So first Obama tried to invade Syria
Now your saying obama didn't do enough

Can't have it both ways oggy

So we didn't invade

And oggy disapproves

no. im just not gonna give credit where it isn't due.

Obama did not save us from war. The backlash to his plans for war is what saved us from war.

So oggy disapproves of what Obama did do
And oggy disapproves of what Obama didn't do

Your making yourself look foolish oggy

Cheeky then why did Romney say he supported possible boots in tr ground in Syria during the 3rd debate

I don't pull stuff out of my ass
McCain and Romney made it clear they want an escalation in syria
Guess you don't remember Romney wanting troops in Syria
http://rt.com/news/romney-attack-assad-syria-531/

not really. I never approve of undeclared illegal wars.

Obama is not the one who reached a diplomatic solution, Putin was.

John Kerry said boots on the ground wasn't off the table.