TwinTownBisonFan wrote:Great poll options...
I think this situation is too much like Iran... if we arm the rebels we undermine the legitimacy of their grassroots movement to take control of their country.
It sucks to watch from the outside - especially as Iran and Russia meddle... but that meddling is right now actively working to undermine Assad with his own people.
Wonder where they got them?Report: State Department Warning Region About Danger Of Syria’s Vast WMD Stockpile Once Regime Crumbles…
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/satellite- ... -to-syria/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Ha’aretz has revived the mystery surrounding the inability to find weapons of mass destruction stockpiles in Iraq, the most commonly cited justification for Operation Iraqi Freedom and one of the most embarrassing episodes for the United States. Satellite photos of a suspicious site in Syria are providing new support for the reporting of a Syrian journalist who briefly rocked the world with his reporting that Iraq’s WMD had been sent to three sites in Syria just before the invasion commenced.
Unfortunately, that isn't possible. With global economics the way it is, we would be affected by a war or any sort of conflict that englufs the Middle East. We are already feeling the affects at the pump. Sooner or later, we'll get involved. We have to. The world hates that we get involved, but then bitch and moan when we don't.griz37 wrote:Where's the option for letting them 3rd world fuckers fight their own battles & worrying about our own problems here at home?
Nope. griz37 has it right. Stay out of the crap going on in that area.Ibanez wrote:Unfortunately, that isn't possible. With global economics the way it is, we would be affected by a war or any sort of conflict that englufs the Middle East. We are already feeling the affects at the pump. Sooner or later, we'll get involved. We have to. The world hates that we get involved, but then bitch and moan when we don't.griz37 wrote:Where's the option for letting them 3rd world fuckers fight their own battles & worrying about our own problems here at home?
+1CID1990 wrote:Al Qaeda would like for us to arm the Syrian rebels. That is as a good a reason not to do it as any.
Libya and Egypt are pretty good examples of why we should not waste our money. No matter who wins, they just aren't going to be our friends afterwards anyway.
Listen, I would love to stay out of that region, but you know that won't happen. Be realistic and take off your blinders. THis isn't 1914. We are in a small world and economies, markets, people, et... are all connected. I know very well the results on an intervention. I also know that if we go it alone (which we shouldn't) we're fucked. Therefore, that's why I stated that the world should decide, i.e. NATO and/or the UN. It isn't our job to police the world. The UN has set the precedent with Bosnio, Libyia Grenada, etc... Let me repeat, America should not go in and assist. ICluck U wrote:Nope. griz37 has it right. Stay out of the crap going on in that area.Ibanez wrote:
Unfortunately, that isn't possible. With global economics the way it is, we would be affected by a war or any sort of conflict that englufs the Middle East. We are already feeling the affects at the pump. Sooner or later, we'll get involved. We have to. The world hates that we get involved, but then bitch and moan when we don't.
Ibanez...tell me what is happening now in Libya. Do you know the results of that "intervention"? What is going on in Egypt? Somalia? How have those interventions turned out for us? How about Iraq? Afghanistan?
And if we help the rebels in Syria...what are we going to do, in front of the whole world, when the majority of the people of Bahrain erupt in revolution against their oppressive minority government a week after we start arming the people of Syria?
It's a joke...we aren't going in to save people at all...and we certainly don't have to go in to defend OUR (as in, normal people's) economic interests.
It's a world of laughter
A world of tears
It's a world of hopes
And a world of fears
There's so much that we share
That it's time we're aware
It's a small world after all
It's a small world after all
It's a small world after all
It's a small world after all
It's a small, small world
Agreed.Ibanez wrote:Let me restate, the USA should NOT arm the rebels or the Syrian Government. However, the UN or NATO goes in, we must abide by our alliances and only intervene to protect innocent lives. Let them fight for thier freedom. If you tihnk this won't affect us, I have some ocean front property in Arizona that is priced to SELL!
Whoa! You are reading from the United States Guide to Covert Takeovers and Nation-Building, 1957 edition. The manual was updated in 1992 after the fall of the USSR.kalm wrote:I think we should go in, back a new strongman who will be in power for the next 30 years, then help to unseat him when he decides to get too uppity, and wonder why the commoners don't fully respect us.
Get with it man!That's a good point.Ibanez wrote:Whoa! You are reading from the United States Guide to Covert Takeovers and Nation-Building, 1957 edition. The manual was updated in 1992 after the fall of the USSR.kalm wrote:I think we should go in, back a new strongman who will be in power for the next 30 years, then help to unseat him when he decides to get too uppity, and wonder why the commoners don't fully respect us.
OK, genius...time to step up and prove the underlying fears about your need to take action.Ibanez wrote:Listen, I would love to stay out of that region, but you know that won't happen. Be realistic and take off your blinders. THis isn't 1914. We are in a small world and economies, markets, people, et... are all connected.
) to go in...can you explain why we need to go in and "do something"? I'm not going to give you a lecture on macroeconomics, i'm only referring to the emprical evidence of how civil unrest in a already unstable region, can have affect other parts of the world. Remember that stock market crash in 1929 and how Europe suffered alongside us. It's similiar to that. Or, how OPEC punished the US when we re supplied the Israeli military in 1973. Look at history, it repeats itself. We are not alone and keeping our heads in the sand will only invite trouble, like the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, 9/11, for example. I'm not an economist by no means, but after studying and earning a degree in military history, being active in many historical groups and contributing to historical essays for various publications, I have developed some knowledge of these sort of affairs and how they play out on the world stage. And the UN is not jus us, quit being a typical ignorant American. The UN isn't just for military action. the reason ist falls greatly on the USA is b/c of our superior military and technology. If you need a lecture on the UN Security Council, that can be arranged.Cluck U wrote:OK, genius...time to step up and prove the underlying fears about your need to take action.Ibanez wrote:Listen, I would love to stay out of that region, but you know that won't happen. Be realistic and take off your blinders. THis isn't 1914. We are in a small world and economies, markets, people, et... are all connected.
If we should not go in alone...and we should not arm the rebels...and we should wait until NATO (WTF does NATO have to do with Syria) or the UN (uh...that's us, despite the Libyan fiasco that has worked out well so far
In other words, if we don't go in, what will happen to the world economy that won't happen if we do go in?
What has happened to oil output and the world economy since Lybia? What has happened to oil output and world economy since Iraq? Since Egypt? Since Tunisia? Since Afghanistan?
Please be specific about your economic domino theory...there's a whole world waiting for your informed answers. You have a chance right here to put money and intelligence into your thoughts. Go for it...I'll be waiting form you to make sense of it all.
This.CID1990 wrote:Al Qaeda would like for us to arm the Syrian rebels. That is as a good a reason not to do it as any.
Libya and Egypt are pretty good examples of why we should not waste our money. No matter who wins, they just aren't going to be our friends afterwards anyway.
I agree with you, but reality won't let that happen. You know that.CID1990 wrote:Al Qaeda would like for us to arm the Syrian rebels. That is as a good a reason not to do it as any.
Libya and Egypt are pretty good examples of why we should not waste our money. No matter who wins, they just aren't going to be our friends afterwards anyway.
Holy Crap, I’m being lectured by a military historian who is comparing an uprising in Syria to the 1929 stock market crash and who is worried about the big, bad “communist” allies of Syria…doing what, exactly? Do you envision Russian divisions blasting through Georgia, Armenia, Turkey, Iran and Iraq? Sure, Russia wants to have even more of their civilian aircraft and theaters blown up by Muslim fanatics. And China? They’ll march their troops a couple thousand miles through underground tunnels…I can hear them digging right now.Ibanez wrote:I'm not going to give you a lecture on macroeconomics, i'm only referring to the emprical evidence of how civil unrest in a already unstable region, can have affect other parts of the world. Remember that stock market crash in 1929 and how Europe suffered alongside us. It's similiar to that. Or, how OPEC punished the US when we re supplied the Israeli military in 1973. Look at history, it repeats itself. We are not alone and keeping our heads in the sand will only invite trouble, like the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, 9/11, for example. I'm not an economist by no means, but after studying and earning a degree in military history, being active in many historical groups and contributing to historical essays for various publications, I have developed some knowledge of these sort of affairs and how they play out on the world stage. And the UN is not jus us, quit being a typical ignorant American. The UN isn't just for military action. the reason ist falls greatly on the USA is b/c of our superior military and technology. If you need a lecture on the UN Security Council, that can be arranged.
The reason the UN has done nothing in Syria is b/c of
1) the "rebels" are losely organized unlike those in Libya. This is way different than Libya. The Libyan rebels were organized, had terriroty, were fighting a military that wasn't as loyal to the gov't unlike hte Syrian militar which is. There are differences here.
2) The two dissenting votes on the UNSC just happen to be China and Russia, the communist allies of Syria
