[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="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.
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="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="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="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="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.
[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"][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.
Log in to comment