[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Person0"] Planes vs Syria air defenses = bad idea. Unless cruise missiles are used to weaken them.No. You can use air to surface missiles without even flying in their airspace. And they can use SAMs back.No. Israel does it all the time. Uses missiles against targets without flying over their airspace.
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] The strike is going to be via cruise missiles (can't hit underground targets). And they aren't touching the air force.
This whole strike is symbolic at best and incredibly stupid.
KC_Hokie
Sends a message about using chemical weapons.lol...no it doesn't. Watch Assad strike using chemical weapons a few days later. Not just to him to others too. Then we would hit him again and harder. Assad doesn't seem suicidal, because if the rebels win he's gonna end up like Gaddafi, having the US bomb him doesn't help him to win.
[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"][QUOTE="Person0"] This isn't Iraq...Haven't you read the thread? People suggested bombing the country altogether, as opposed to military sites. Ironically, they were vehemently anti-war not too long ago. I get that it's anger pouring in, but it's not consistent, is childish, offensive, and downright lacking in principle. It's genocidal to suggest indiscriminately leveling an entire country with all its citizenry. As if it being war-battered not enough. You make a great point.. This is what is sad.. People changing their viewpoints to hold interest with others. If your seriously anti war.. It takes a lot for you to admit that we need to go to war or strike another country.. If syria used a huge chemical weapon, that was seeping into other countries and the world..Then that's when I would start to become concerned. They use chemical weapons once (shorter radius )..and we start banging the war/drone strikes drums, and don't even really know who even caused it.I'm not against wars but I am against really stupid wars. Obama's little strike is purely symbolic and will be used as propaganda and a victory by Assad.
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]No. You can use air to surface missiles without even flying in their airspace. KC_Hokie
And they can use SAMs back.No. Israel does it all the time. Uses missiles against targets without flying over their airspace. Those missiles only have a certain range.
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Person0"] Sends a message about using chemical weapons.lol...no it doesn't. Watch Assad strike using chemical weapons a few days later. Not just to him to others too. Then we would hit him again and harder. Assad doesn't seem suicidal, because if the rebels win he's gonna end up like Gaddafi, having the US bomb him doesn't help him to win.Obama's limited strike isn't going to hurt Assad much at all. He will declare victory and probably use chemical weapons a few days later.
The world was silent when the rebels were burning Christian villages to the ground. The world was silent when the rebels were slaughtering Christian children. The world was silent when these rebels were eating the remains of their human victims.
The world was silent when you, President Obama, gave the order that burned Qadaffis grandchildren to death.
So, apparently, the world can be silent. It's silent most of the time.when atrocities are committed, especially the atrocities you commit, Barack.
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]lol...no it doesn't. Watch Assad strike using chemical weapons a few days later.KC_Hokie
Not just to him to others too. Then we would hit him again and harder. Assad doesn't seem suicidal, because if the rebels win he's gonna end up like Gaddafi, having the US bomb him doesn't help him to win.Obama's limited strike isn't going to hurt Assad much at all. He will declare victory and probably use chemical weapons a few days later. Every little bit matters in a stalemate.
Between the Republicans and Democrats loving war.. Anyone feel like the Obama administration has been planning to attack for years now, and were just waiting for an excuse like iraq? Now that Syris used a chemical weapon, they thought, this may be the best excuse we're going to get to go over there... This situation sounds awfully familiar.. and stinks to the high heavens.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Person0"] And they can use SAMs back.Person0
No. Israel does it all the time. Uses missiles against targets without flying over their airspace. Those missiles only have a certain range. Yea...and the Arab League and Turkey have the same missiles and same planes. They could do this strike.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Person0"] Not just to him to others too. Then we would hit him again and harder. Assad doesn't seem suicidal, because if the rebels win he's gonna end up like Gaddafi, having the US bomb him doesn't help him to win.Person0
Obama's limited strike isn't going to hurt Assad much at all. He will declare victory and probably use chemical weapons a few days later. Every little bit matters in a stalemate. Yea great idea...let's tip a stalemate in favor of al-qaeda groups and give them the opportunity to capture chemical weapons.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"]Haven't you read the thread? People suggested bombing the country altogether, as opposed to military sites. Ironically, they were vehemently anti-war not too long ago. I get that it's anger pouring in, but it's not consistent, is childish, offensive, and downright lacking in principle. It's genocidal to suggest indiscriminately leveling an entire country with all its citizenry. As if it being war-battered not enough. You make a great point.. This is what is sad.. People changing their viewpoints to hold interest with others. If your seriously anti war.. It takes a lot for you to admit that we need to go to war or strike another country.. If syria used a huge chemical weapon, that was seeping into other countries and the world..Then that's when I would start to become concerned. They use chemical weapons once (shorter radius )..and we start banging the war/drone strikes drums, and don't even really know who even caused it.I'm not against wars but I am against really stupid wars. Obama's little strike is purely symbolic and will be used as propaganda and a victory by Assad. That's what I'm saying.. I'm not against war either.. If we're going to war, or are going to strike.. it seriously needs to be a good reason.. World War 2 was the last war that we got attacked hard, a countries were trying to take over the world, and were threatning our self defense... That was a necessary war.
[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"][QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"][QUOTE="Person0"] This isn't Iraq...Haven't you read the thread? People suggested bombing the country altogether, as opposed to military sites. Ironically, they were vehemently anti-war not too long ago. I get that it's anger pouring in, but it's not consistent, is childish, offensive, and downright lacking in principle. It's genocidal to suggest indiscriminately leveling an entire country with all its citizenry. As if it being war-battered not enough. You make a great point.. This is what is sad.. People changing their viewpoints to hold interest with others. If your seriously anti war.. It takes a lot for you to admit that we need to go to war or strike another country.. If syria used a huge chemical weapon, that was seeping into other countries and the world..Then that's when I would start to become concerned. They use chemical weapons once (shorter radius )..and we start banging the war/drone strikes drums, and don't even really know who even caused it.Yeah, OT can get silly at times. The way I see it, American involvement stems from an ultra-powerful lobby that few can probably stop, the chemical attacks are just the casus beli they need to justify an international opposition to Assad. The minute you stop thinking about war and more on how, as long as you will reap the benefits of this lobby, without deploying any troops on the ground, I think it will get easier to digest.
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Obama's limited strike isn't going to hurt Assad much at all. He will declare victory and probably use chemical weapons a few days later.KC_Hokie
Every little bit matters in a stalemate. Yea great idea...let's tip a stalemate in favor of al-qaeda groups and give them the opportunity to capture chemical weapons.
Obama authorized the fire bombing of Qadaffis home.
Qadaffi wasn't even there . . . but his grandchildren were.
They burned to death.
So according to liberals - obama can set children on fire and burn them to death, but Assad can't use chemical weapons.
Why is it okay for obama to kill civilians, but it's not okay for Assad?
Person0
Look up the word intent. Now looks at different intentions between the two. Intent doesn't care. Who gets **** .. get's ****.. Same thing to me.. Still Ruthless.
Also I've been hearing this mission is all about chemical weapons. So. Uhm. Why attack Assad? Certainly people do not buy into the recent agitprop, Christ.
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Yea great idea...let's tip a stalemate in favor of al-qaeda groups and give them the opportunity to capture chemical weapons.
This idea is just so colossally stupid.
KC_Hokie
Its not just Islamists fighting.They are the most powerful and aggressive fighters. And they don't like sharing with secularists. The FSA is about even power and number wise with the Islamists.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Person0"] Its not just Islamists fighting.Person0
They are the most powerful and aggressive fighters. And they don't like sharing with secularists. The FSA is about even power and number wise with the Islamists.Most FSA are just militia protecting their neighborhood or town. They aren't offensive, ruthless, experienced fighters like the Islamists.
And Islamists never share. There will be a war after this one if Assad falls and the FSA is in deep shit.
[QUOTE="MrPraline"]Also I've been hearing this mission is all about chemical weapons. So. Uhm. Why attack Assad? Certainly people do not buy into the recent agitprop, Christ. It's not about chemical weapons. It's about GCC wanting Assad out, and how a single royal of theirs have enough publicly-declared (as in, this is what he's showing to the world) money to buy 25% of the Netherlands. Put it simply, USA will do someone's dirty work, since they're too rich to move off a chair on their own.
Obama isn't in al Qaeda, but he is al Qaeda's best freind.
MrPraline
hah yeah. Barry Obama supporting the Al Qaeda. With CIA trained rebels. It's Osama Bin Laden in the 80s all over again. What a puppet show. Obama = vigilante in chief
[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] Yup and it was a big shock for the Prime Minister. He was convinced he was easily going to get the vote. KC_Hokie
The brits are just being pansies. They still agree that Assad did it.They've already voted no. They aren't with us.
You know something is a really bad idea if the UK isn't even with us.
Like I said ,they agree he did it.
''Now the British say that in their judgment, the Syrian government used lethal C.W. on 14 occasions from 2012, adding that this judgment was made with the highest possible level of certainty following an exhaustive review. They added, A clear pattern of regime use has therefore been established.
[QUOTE="killzowned24"] The brits are just being pansies. They still agree that Assad did it.killzowned24
They've already voted no. They aren't with us.
You know something is a really bad idea if the UK isn't even with us.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/graphic/2013/sep/03/syria-chemical-weapons-dossiers-compared Like I said ,they agree he did it. ''Now the British say that in their judgment, the Syrian government used lethal C.W. on 14 occasions from 2012, adding that this judgment was made with the highest possible level of certainty following an exhaustive review. They added, A clear pattern of regime use has therefore been established. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/world/middleeast/allies-intelligence-on-syria-all-points-to-assad-forces.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 They voted against taking military action. The UK isn't even with us. That should set off major alarm bells in Washington.
[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]They've already voted no. They aren't with us.
You know something is a really bad idea if the UK isn't even with us.
KC_Hokie
http://www.theguardian.com/world/graphic/2013/sep/03/syria-chemical-weapons-dossiers-compared Like I said ,they agree he did it. ''Now the British say that in their judgment, the Syrian government used lethal C.W. on 14 occasions from 2012, adding that this judgment was made with the highest possible level of certainty following an exhaustive review. They added, A clear pattern of regime use has therefore been established. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/world/middleeast/allies-intelligence-on-syria-all-points-to-assad-forces.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 They voted against taking military action. The UK isn't even with us. That should set off major alarm bells in Washington. What are you not understanding. I said they agree he did it ,but are willing to let it slide.
[QUOTE="Victorious_Fize"][QUOTE="MrPraline"]Also I've been hearing this mission is all about chemical weapons. So. Uhm. Why attack Assad? Certainly people do not buy into the recent agitprop, Christ. It's not about chemical weapons. It's about GCC wanting Assad out, and how a single royal of theirs have enough publicly-declared (as in, this is what he's showing to the world) money to buy 25% of the Netherlands. Put it simply, USA will do someone's dirty work, since they're too rich to move off a chair on their own. Hah yeah. Obama is a little bitch puppet (and what's been new since 2008) in this thing. Shame though. And meant that all the MSM is talking about is the "chemical weapons" (which the rebels prob used because in the new normal it's more reasonable to trust Putin than the POTUS).
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]They are the most powerful and aggressive fighters. And they don't like sharing with secularists. KC_Hokie
The FSA is about even power and number wise with the Islamists.Most FSA are just militia protecting their neighborhood or town. They aren't offensive, ruthless, experienced fighters like the Islamists.
And Islamists never share. There will be a war after this one if Assad falls and the FSA is in deep shit.
Well many of the defecting soldiers joined the FSA.
[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="killzowned24"] http://www.theguardian.com/world/graphic/2013/sep/03/syria-chemical-weapons-dossiers-compared Like I said ,they agree he did it. ''Now the British say that in their judgment, the Syrian government used lethal C.W. on 14 occasions from 2012, adding that this judgment was made with the highest possible level of certainty following an exhaustive review. They added, A clear pattern of regime use has therefore been established. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/world/middleeast/allies-intelligence-on-syria-all-points-to-assad-forces.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 They voted against taking military action. The UK isn't even with us. That should set off major alarm bells in Washington. What are you not understanding. I said they agree he did it ,but are willing to let it slide.That even the UK isn't with us in this strike.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] They voted against taking military action. The UK isn't even with us. That should set off major alarm bells in Washington. What are you not understanding. I said they agree he did it ,but are willing to let it slide.That even the UK isn't with us in this strike. Actually the have said no military force,but will help with intel and such.
[QUOTE="Person0"] The FSA is about even power and number wise with the Islamists.Person0
Most FSA are just militia protecting their neighborhood or town. They aren't offensive, ruthless, experienced fighters like the Islamists.
And Islamists never share. There will be a war after this one if Assad falls and the FSA is in deep shit.
Well many of the defecting soldiers joined the FSA.Yea they went home to protect their homes. If you look at the major offensive victories for the rebels they were all lead by the Islamists.
[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="killzowned24"] What are you not understanding. I said they agree he did it ,but are willing to let it slide.That even the UK isn't with us in this strike. Actually the have said no military force,but will help with intel and such. Yea...our closest ally isn't even with us and thinks a strike is stupid.
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Most FSA are just militia protecting their neighborhood or town. They aren't offensive, ruthless, experienced fighters like the Islamists.
And Islamists never share. There will be a war after this one if Assad falls and the FSA is in deep shit.
KC_Hokie
Well many of the defecting soldiers joined the FSA.Yea they went home to protect their homes. If you look at the major offensive victories for the rebels they were all lead by the Islamists. Well that's good then. The experienced FSA fighters are staying alive, while the Islamists are taking the brunt of Assad's military. So the Islamists have higher losses. Weaker Islamists is good.
[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]That even the UK isn't with us in this strike.KC_Hokie
Actually the have said no military force,but will help with intel and such. Yea...our closest ally isn't even with us and thinks a strike is stupid. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10278355/Syria-crisis-Britain-will-play-active-role-in-military-action-despite-vote-defeat.html
[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Person0"] Well many of the defecting soldiers joined the FSA.Yea they went home to protect their homes. If you look at the major offensive victories for the rebels they were all lead by the Islamists. Well that's good then. The experienced FSA fighters are staying alive, while the Islamists are taking the brunt of Assad's military. So the Islamists have higher losses. Weaker Islamists is good.The Islamists will kick the crap out of the FSA in the next war if Assad falls.
[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="killzowned24"] Actually the have said no military force,but will help with intel and such. Yea...our closest ally isn't even with us and thinks a strike is stupid. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10278355/Syria-crisis-Britain-will-play-active-role-in-military-action-despite-vote-defeat.html Really neat but they are unwilling to strike with us. Again, major alarm bells should be going off.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Just read what McCain added at the last minute. This will never pass in the House.Hemmaroids
About arming rebels something he wanted to do a long time ago when AQ wasn't such a strong influence? The arming is strategically important. Just bombing using cruise missles won't really put up a fight against Assad in the long term as arming the rebels. Though I am iffy on the rebels now (compared to 30 months ago) I do support arming them to achieve a strategic task.It's more than that. What McCain added topples the Assad regime. And it will never pass the House.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] Yea...our closest ally isn't even with us and thinks a strike is stupid. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10278355/Syria-crisis-Britain-will-play-active-role-in-military-action-despite-vote-defeat.html Really neat but they are unwilling to strike with us. Again, major alarm bells should be going off. I feel really bad for all the countries we drag into this.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] Yea...our closest ally isn't even with us and thinks a strike is stupid. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10278355/Syria-crisis-Britain-will-play-active-role-in-military-action-despite-vote-defeat.html Really neat but they are unwilling to strike with us. Again, major alarm bells should be going off. yes, it shows the grow more pansies by the decade. they do after all shoot bb guns as sport.
Really neat but they are unwilling to strike with us. Again, major alarm bells should be going off. yes, it shows the grow more pansies by the decade. they do after all shoot bb guns as sport. No, it's because this strike is purely symbolic and idiotic. It will be used as propaganda by Assad if the strikes are weak. If they are heavier it will help Al-Qaeda.
[QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="killzowned24"] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10278355/Syria-crisis-Britain-will-play-active-role-in-military-action-despite-vote-defeat.html Really neat but they are unwilling to strike with us. Again, major alarm bells should be going off. I feel really bad for all the countries we drag into this. Looks like absolutely no one is attacking with us. Obama is the world's vigilante.
[QUOTE="killzowned24"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] Really neat but they are unwilling to strike with us. Again, major alarm bells should be going off.KC_Hokie
yes, it shows the grow more pansies by the decade. they do after all shoot bb guns as sport. No, it's because this strike is purely symbolic and idiotic. It will be used as propaganda by Assad if the strikes are weak. If they are heavier it will help Al-Qaeda. I suggest you watch the US debate because that came up, and Kerry agreed that Assad will do just that because that is not the purpose of the action,it's only to downgrade his ability.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"] Really neat but they are unwilling to strike with us. Again, major alarm bells should be going off. I feel really bad for all the countries we drag into this. Looks like absolutely no one is attacking with us. Obama is the world's vigilante. I really hope you are right on that dude lol
[QUOTE="killzowned24"] yes, it shows the grow more pansies by the decade. they do after all shoot bb guns as sport.killzowned24
No, it's because this strike is purely symbolic and idiotic. It will be used as propaganda by Assad if the strikes are weak. If they are heavier it will help Al-Qaeda. I suggest you watch the US debate because that came up, and Kerry agreed that Assad will do just that because that is not the purpose of the action,it's only to downgrade his ability.Yea exactly...symbolic strike. Assad has had 2+ weeks to prepare for these strikes too. He's moved everything around.
Log in to comment