The Syrian Situation

[Marx]

McCain visits rebels in Syria

Stupid move by McCain. No way should the US get involved, considering the rebels are a hodgepodge group that would likely form a Islamist-based government that would eventually be hostile to the US. Let the Syrians settle it themselves.

I agree. I don't think this was a very good move by McCain.

Well, this is one of those things, that yes, the world would be/and would have been a better place without the Assad family, but once they are out.....who is in? A major question we have to answer.

They/We could do pretty much what we did in Iraq back Desert Storm. Destroy his strongholds, ammunition, send him and his family on the run without sitting foot in the country.

The problem with that is.....I have a feeling that something even worse than the "Muslim Brotherhood" in Egypt would end up in power.

...that is my concern as well. If Assad is no longer in power, who replaces him? I'm sure it wouldn't be someone any better.

 

[Alex_Spider]

Stupid move by McCain. No way should the US get involved, considering the rebels are a hodgepodge group that would likely form a Islamist-based government that would eventually be hostile to the US. Let the Syrians settle it themselves.

...that is my concern as well. If Assad is no longer in power, who replaces him? I'm sure it wouldn't be someone any better.

How are you so sure about this?

Well, this is one of those things, that yes, the world would be/and would have been a better place without the Assad family, but once they are out.....who is in? A major question we have to answer.

I don't think there is anything worse than that psychopath. Nevertheless the Syrian people deserve their freedom, and the killings got to stop by the Assad regime at any cost. Least we could do, at least Europe, (U.S. has enough problems already) is aid the rebels with medicine and weapons.

 

[Marx]

UPDATE: WHITE HOUSE SAYS SYRIA HAS "CROSSED LINE" WITH USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/13/politics/syria-us-chemical-weapons/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

[Kelly]

How are you so sure about this?

Read up on the subject, there is plenty out there about how many different groups are aiding the rebels.

I don't think there is anything worse than that psychopath. Nevertheless the Syrian people deserve their freedom, and the killings got to stop by the Assad regime at any cost. Least we could do, at least Europe, (U.S. has enough problems already) is aid the rebels with medicine and weapons.

IMO, we should have set up a no-fly zone a long time ago. I do not FOR ANY REASON believe we should put boots on the ground.

But the fact that we have not heard from the President yet, not sure where he is at the moment....and the fact that he plans on talking with our Allies at the G8 Summit NEXT WEEK about what should be done??????

*sighs* I just give up...

If Russia and Iran get more involved, holy crap!

 

[enterthemadness]

So I really skimmed it, but we are sending small arms, ammo, and some tanks to the rebels?


I dunno....but chemical weapons on your own people is bad....but we have a big debt.....so I am mixed on this.

 

[Kelly]

They can't send the big stuff, it may end up turned against us as it was in Afghanistan. No Fly Zone is a way to go as well.

 

[enterthemadness]

Sooooo...Iran is sending 4,000 troops to Syria....



Now of course I dunno if a WW3 will break out, just some friends on Facebook saying so. At this point, we need to cut ties. No need for us to be in another war.


Iraq, Afgan, now Syria. Noooooooooooo....no one wins in the Middle East, so get out.

 

[Kelly]

Sooooo...Iran is sending 4,000 troops to Syria....



Now of course I dunno if a WW3 will break out, just some friends on Facebook saying so. At this point, we need to cut ties. No need for us to be in another war.


Iraq, Afgan, now Syria. Noooooooooooo....no one wins in the Middle East, so get out.

If we totally get out of the Middle East, we will have to begin drilling here again....I'm fine with that, but not sure that the libs are...

 

[Webfoot Hero]

If we totally get out of the Middle East, we will have to begin drilling here again....I'm fine with that, but not sure that the libs are...

They keep saying the time is now to move our vehicles away from fossil fuels but don't give an alternative energy to replace it with that keeps vehicles from having to refuel/recharge every 100-200 miles or is cost effective.

As for Syria, I don't really think we should be getting involved. It doesn't really buy us any long-term goodwill. They may welcome our help now but whenever a new government takes over, they'll go right back to hating us. Plus, whoever controls the weapons (likely the Islamic-backed militias) we give them after the conflict would probably turn them against us should we get involved somewhere else in the ME.

 

[Kelly]

They keep saying the time is now to move our vehicles away from fossil fuels but don't give an alternative energy to replace it with that keeps vehicles from having to refuel/recharge every 100-200 miles or is cost effective.

As for Syria, I don't really think we should be getting involved. It doesn't really buy us any long-term goodwill. They may welcome our help now but whenever a new government takes over, they'll go right back to hating us. Plus, whoever controls the weapons (likely the Islamic-backed militias) we give them after the conflict would probably turn them against us should we get involved somewhere else in the ME.

It doesn't matter if we move vehicles away from fossil fuels. Petroleum is the base for 1,000s upon 1,000s of items that we use every day. Pretty much everything in your home, has a petroleum base. It is ridiculous and downright stupid to say that we will be able to move away from fossil fuels. I see us moving more towards natural gas in the immediate future.

As far as weapons against us, hell we can look at Afghanistan to show us how that works. The only thing we had going for us there is that those weapons were from the 80s, whereas the weapons we give to the rebels in Syria won't be that old. IMO, we do a no fly zone and that is it....if other countries want to go in then fine.

If we want to spend money there, give it to Jordan to help them take care of all of those refugees. If we are so hell bent on being a humanitarian country, help Jordan.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

It doesn't matter if we move vehicles away from fossil fuels. Petroleum is the base for 1,000s upon 1,000s of items that we use every day. Pretty much everything in your home, has a petroleum base. It is ridiculous and downright stupid to say that we will be able to move away from fossil fuels. I see us moving more towards natural gas in the immediate future.

As far as weapons against us, hell we can look at Afghanistan to show us how that works. The only thing we had going for us there is that those weapons were from the 80s, whereas the weapons we give to the rebels in Syria won't be that old. IMO, we do a no fly zone and that is it....if other countries want to go in then fine.

If we want to spend money there, give it to Jordan to help them take care of all of those refugees. If we are so hell bent on being a humanitarian country, help Jordan.

Compressed and liquefied natural gas needs to gain some more wide-spread usage before I can say they're viable options. There are companies switching their fleet of vehicles to those but it works for them since they typically have some sort of central fueling area and tend to get tax credits for using alternative fuels that the average driver can't get. Plus, people still protest the use of CNG and LNG due to the environmental impact of its production and transport, which has stalled several attempts to build pipelines and processing plants.

As for Syria, A no-fly zone is about the only thing we should do militarily. Arming a bunch of militias that we don't know all that well with weapons is not a good idea. I have no problem with humanitarian aid but getting involved in another ME country does us no good in the long-term.

 

[regwec]

Iran's election of a more moderate president, Russia's joint statement with the UK on the situation, and Egypt's condemnation of the Syrian regime, will likely have a greater effect than anything the US could do at this stage. Losing allies is painful.

 

[Kelly]

Iran's election of a more moderate president, Russia's joint statement with the UK on the situation, and Egypt's condemnation of the Syrian regime, will likely have a greater effect than anything the US could do at this stage. Losing allies is painful.

I definitely hope you are right...

 

[Cosmic]

Someone said last week that the situation in Syria is "like Iraq, but worse" and I agree.

Now we are going to arm the rebels. Not really surprised, as I believe we already have been quietly arming them for months, but now it's being made official. Maybe for the purpose of sending more weapons, more tech, supplies, and heavier firepower that would've been too obvious before the announcement. Maybe it's to send a message to the Shi'ite factions that we're not going to invade, and probably won't drop bombs, but we're not going to stand aside and let them win easily.

I don't want a no-fly zone. What happens if and when one of our aircraft crashes or gets shot down behind enemy lines? And when civilians and allies get bombed by accident? I don't think they're going to accept this level of risk at this point.

 

[Kelly]

Someone said last week that the situation in Syria is "like Iraq, but worse" and I agree.

Now we are going to arm the rebels. Not really surprised, as I believe we already have been quietly arming them for months, but now it's being made official. Maybe for the purpose of sending more weapons, more tech, supplies, and heavier firepower that would've been too obvious before the announcement. Maybe it's to send a message to the Shi'ite factions that we're not going to invade, and probably won't drop bombs, but we're not going to stand aside and let them win easily.

I don't want a no-fly zone. What happens if and when one of our aircraft crashes or gets shot down behind enemy lines? And when civilians and allies get bombed by accident? I don't think they're going to accept this level of risk at this point.

IMO, the least risk to all of those things you just mentioned is far less with a No-Fly Zone than it is sending in arms.

 

[Cosmic]

Least risk to you and me, but to the pilots flying missions...if they go down, then they're screwed. Nobody is going to be able to rescue them, and I don't know what we would have to negotiate with in order to get a deal for their release. From the sound of things right now, I don't think they'd necessarily even be safe if they went down behind friendly lines. I guess it depends on which type of rebel faction finds them first.

Apparently, 95% of the war fatalities have been from ground-based weaponry. So, I'm not even sure why we're even talking about doing this anymore, considering how much it would potentially cost in lives, treasure, and future diplomatic relations with Russia and Iran.

 

[Kelly]

Least risk to you and me, but to the pilots flying missions...if they go down, then they're screwed. Nobody is going to be able to rescue them, and I don't know what we would have to negotiate with in order to get a deal for their release. From the sound of things right now, I don't think they'd necessarily even be safe if they went down behind friendly lines. I guess it depends on which type of rebel faction finds them first.

Apparently, 95% of the war fatalities have been from ground-based weaponry. So, I'm not even sure why we're even talking about doing this anymore, considering how much it would potentially cost in lives, treasure, and future diplomatic relations with Russia and Iran.

That is why they train like they do...hell with that mentality they shouldn't even fly training missions.

I'm very much a "lets stay home and let them blow each other up" kind of thinker here....but if we are going to do anything, a no fly zone will do the most good, we won't end up seeing the stuff shot at us at a later date and maybe we can give them a fighting chance. If not that, then don't go at all.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

According to the Pew Research Center, a good amount of the American public doesn't want the US getting involved in Syria.

http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/17/public-remains-opposed-to-arming-syrian-rebels/

 

[chamber-music]

I watched this heartbreaking BBC documentary about the Syrian civil war's effect on Syrian children last night.

A BBC reposter spent 6 months in Syria tracking children from the pro-Assad side and the rebel side.

These children had been traumatized, politicised, disabled and displaced.

One little girl told the reporter about her family surviving on eating rats and one 16 year old rebel kid fighting on the frontline against Assad's forces talked about an 11 year old boy they were looking after who was kidnapped by the extremist rebel groups and dismembered.

Here is a small clip

Syria's children of war
[YT]/dxdLv7w1GlE[/YT]