Al-Qaeda, Our Allies

[echelon1k1]

i think it will end with bombing the shit out of some military posts. no boots on the ground.

You just can't get it right can you;

http://www.brandeis.edu/crown/publications/meb/MEB64.pdf

Intervention in Syria: Reconciling Moral Premises and Realistic Outcomes

The Syrian military, while no match for the full firepower of the U.S. or NATO, is nevertheless not an insignificant force—and,more critically, it is enmeshed in densely populated civilian centers. To disarmit without inflicting huge human casualties would require not simply an air campaign, as was the case in Libya, but rather, by some estimates, two to three hundred thousand boots on the ground. Such force would be crucial to fully defeat the regime’s security forces, enforce civil peace, and prevent the subsequent unleashing of retaliatory massacres by opposition groups. Furthermore, to have lasting impact, such an intervention would have to be prolonged and would require extensive investment in state-building, at great cost.

 

[echelon1k1]

Move the civilians out, and let them kill each other. Problem solved.

and who will do that? God?

 

[echelon1k1]

IMO, those civilians should pick up arms for one side or the other or flee where they can.

They will, sunnis are the majority and alawite shia the minority and it's the alawites that hold power...

 

[UncleBuck]

The rebels despite what you may think aren't this noble bunch who want freedom, democracy and equality for all Syrians

you're confusing me with someone who may think that about the rebels.

i don't really care about syria's civil war. my only problem is with standing idly by while someone gasses their own people. there's even a UN treaty about this type of thing.

 

[echelon1k1]

it's pretty clear that a lot of you are under many misconceptions about the impending military action.

it is not in support of one faction or the other, it is a retaliatory action against the use of WMDs on one's own people.

i may as well have made a fart joke though, that distinction will fall on deaf ears.

Farts and lies are the same thing coming from you... You couldn't be more wrong about the reasons for this "kinetic military operations"...

 

[echelon1k1]

you're confusing me with someone who may think that about the rebels.

i don't really care about syria's civil war. my only problem is with standing idly by while someone gasses their own people. there's even a UN treaty about this type of thing.

there is also UN treaties about droning the shit outta civilians... Are you saying you're all for UN doctrine now? Hypocrite much?

 

[UncleBuck]

You just can't get it right can you;

http://www.brandeis.edu/crown/publications/meb/MEB64.pdf

Intervention in Syria: Reconciling Moral Premises and Realistic Outcomes

how does any of that contradict a thing i have said?

your article says "to disarm" and "to fully defeat". no one important is saying that the goal is to "fully defeat" assad's regime, you fucking moron. do you even have your ears open for fuck sake? maybe invest in Q-tips.

there are no word for the outright idiocy of your unfounded tangents.

 

[BossHoggins]

War is one of those things where you are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

I don't like war, but I understand that there is often more to it than I'm privy to, and that info can make a huge difference.

 

[echelon1k1]

how does any of that contradict a thing i have said?

your article says "to disarm" and "to fully defeat". no one important is saying that the goal is to "fully defeat" assad's regime, you fucking moron. do you even have your ears open for fuck sake? maybe invest in Q-tips.

there are no word for the outright idiocy of your unfounded tangents.

"this will be like Libya - no boots on the ground"

"it is not in support of one faction or the other, it is a retaliatory action against the use of WMDs on one's own people"

there are no word for the outright idiocy of your unfounded tangents

 

[UncleBuck]

Farts and lies are the same thing coming from you... You couldn't be more wrong about the reasons for this "kinetic military operations"...

so are you saying this is some kind of false flag gassing perpetrated by the CIA and ordered by obama so that he could be put in an awkward political position at a time when he really doesn't need it?

that's the most brilliant fucking thing i have heard all day, right along with ausfailia thuper thecretly taking out bin laden, not to mention the oddly convoluted muslim brotherhood infiltration of the egyptian military only to oust and slaughter their own.

take your fucking pills, PTSD boy, the war is over for you. sit it out.

 

[UncleBuck]

"this will be like Libya - no boots on the ground"

"it is not in support of one faction or the other, it is a retaliatory action against the use of WMDs on one's own people"

there are no word for the outright idiocy of your unfounded tangents

so who's talking about "fully defeating", besides the author of that article you just posted for no good reason whatsoever?

france?

britian?

the US, perhaps?

who the fuck is talking about "full defeat" at this point, margaret?

 

[echelon1k1]

so are you saying this is some kind of false flag gassing perpetrated by the CIA and ordered by obama so that he could be put in an awkward political position at a time when he really doesn't need it?

No it's quite clear that the "rebels", who are made up of sunni terrorists, are supported by the US, probably the CIA or another cut out group, as that falls under their domain...

The US is supporting these terrorists and have so for a while now;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/wikileaks-syria/cable1.html

As the Syria policy review moves apace, and with the apparent collapse of the primary Syrian external opposition organization, one thing appears increasingly clear: U.S. policy may aim less at fostering "regime change" and more toward encouraging "behavior reform." If this assumption holds, then a reassessment of current U.S.-sponsored programming that supports anti-SARG factions, both inside and outside Syria, may prove productive as well.

 

[Harrekin]

so who's talking about "fully defeating", besides the author of that article you just posted for no good reason whatsoever?

france?

britian?

the US, perhaps?

who the fuck is talking about "full defeat" at this point, margaret?

You're so fucking dumb, your trolling has gotten weak to the point it's not even funny anymore.

Try have a logical conversation, if there was an uprising in the US with terrorist rebels attacking the Feds what do you think would happen?

Would Obama use his chemical/nuclear/biological stockpiles on his own people (in a war he's already winning) and incur the wrath of the rest of the world or would he just keep using his considerable conventional firepower?

Logic, it's damning to your idiocy.

 

[echelon1k1]

so who's talking about "fully defeating", besides the author of that article you just posted for no good reason whatsoever?

france?

britian?

the US, perhaps?

who the fuck is talking about "full defeat" at this point, margaret?

so the US is just gonna bomb Syria as a slap on the wrist and expect them to say "sorry amrika we won't do what you do"

 

[UncleBuck]

No it's quite clear that the "rebels", who are made up of sunni terrorists, are supported by the US, probably the CIA or another cut out group, as that falls under their domain...

The US is supporting these terrorists and have so for a while now;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/wikileaks-syria/cable1.html

hey retard,

it's public knowledge that we've been supporting the rebels for some time now. are you dumb dumb? or just single dumb?

the retard tree you keep barking up is the tree labeled "we're gonna totally defeat assad to help the rebels!", and no one is saying that's true. jay carney just said the point is not even to oust assad.

it's a retaliatory action against the use of WMDs on one's own people. it's part of the UN treaty we abide by. to stand by after this and do nothing would be to condone it.

this conspiracy theory you're cooking up is about as credible as the muslim brotherhood spending decades in a plot to oust their own from power and then slaughter them. retarded.


seek help.

 

[UncleBuck]

so the US is just gonna bomb Syria as a slap on the wrist and expect them to say "sorry amrika we won't do what you do"

america has never gassed its own people, sillybird.

 

[UncleBuck]

You're so fucking dumb, your trolling has gotten weak to the point it's not even funny anymore.

Try have a logical conversation, if there was an uprising in the US with terrorist rebels attacking the Feds what do you think would happen?

Would Obama use his chemical/nuclear/biological stockpiles on his own people (in a war he's already winning) and incur the wrath of the rest of the world or would he just keep using his considerable conventional firepower?

Logic, it's damning to your idiocy.

i'll trust the evidence we have and will get over your ridiculous analogies.

 

[Harrekin]

america has never gassed its own people, sillybird.

It just records their every movement, conversation and all their Internet usage...

Largest jail population per capita in the whole world...

But Syria, China and Russia are the oppressive ones...

Cool story, ho.

 

[echelon1k1]

hey retard,it's public knowledge that we've been supporting the rebels* for some time now. are you dumb dumb? or just single dumb?

*Sunni Jihadists - get it right moron...

the retard tree you keep barking up is the tree labeled "we're gonna totally defeat assad to help the rebels!", and no one is saying that's true. jay carney just said the point is not even to oust assad.

You can dress it up however you want at the end of the day it's regime change moron... Every action the US has taken has been contrary to their continued talking points of "this isn't about regime change"... I suppose they will just put down their weapons and live a life of peace and solidarity after this is over...

it's a retaliatory action against the use of WMDs on one's own people. it's part of the UN treaty we abide by. to stand by after this and do nothing would be to condone it.

"We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these out, and if that's so, then there need to be international consequences"

this conspiracy theory you're cooking up is about as credible as the muslim brotherhood spending decades in a plot to oust their own from power and then slaughter them. retarded. eek help.

You got nothing to show but your limited means... seek the comfort of a big and tall woman

 

[fr3d12]

you're confusing me with someone who may think that about the rebels.

i don't really care about syria's civil war. my only problem is with standing idly by while someone gasses their own people. there's even a UN treaty about this type of thing.

The civilians who died by gas aren't the first civilians to die in this conflict, I would guess that many of the rape and torture victims of this conflict wish they got the gas instead of the horrific deaths they received, these heinous crimes are being committed by both the rebels and Govt. forces yet these crimes alone do not warrant intervention according to the international community!
It's such a big deal when chemical weapons are used, sure their use breaks many laws including moral ones but there's also a UN treaty on human rights yet no one gets their knickers in a knot over the treatment of women by basically the whole Arab world , these staggering human rights abuses barely make headlines but cause a hell of lot more suffering than any bomb, chemical or otherwise and affects millions of women and girls daily for the duration of their lives, where's the international uproar and condemnation? there's a UN treaty on war crimes but when Israel commits atrocities on a regular basis it's put down to self defense etc etc.