Syria Gearing Up?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by eric/, Dec 3, 2012.

  1. Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #1
    Link

    I am against American forces on the ground in Syria. Frankly, I don't think the US should intervene at all. It's time for the international community to step up.
     
  2. macrumors 603

    MacBoobsPro

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #2
    December 20th isnt far away :p
     
  3. macrumors 68000

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #3
    The Obama administration has no stomach for "boots on the ground," and the so called international community won't do anything without US leadership.

    The US will recommend sanctions after Syria kills with chemical weapons. They will posture, yell and stamp their feet but do nothing more.

    Syria will go about its business. They, and everyone else, knows that the US has no stomach for anything more right now.
     
  4. macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #4
    Does anyone in the US have the stomach for "boots on the ground" any more? I've heard we're on the edge of a "fiscal cliff". Do we really want to continue bleeding money on wars that don't work? I'm with eric/ on this one. Where is everyone else in the world? Let some other country bankrupt themselves by war. How long have we been in Afghanistan? Is it worth the price we have paid in dead soldiers and debt?
     
  5. TSE
    macrumors 68030

    TSE

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Location:
    St. Paul, Minnesota
  6. macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #6
    A few possibilities for this:

    1) The Assad regime is readying the weapons for use against the rebels.
    2) The Assad regime is increasingly worried about intervention and believes that such weapons could be used to either threaten an invasion force, or actually be used against it.
    3) The effort is actually consolidation, the Assad regime is either trying to get the chemicals under control or trying to get the chemicals ready to ship out of the country, a la Saddam Hussein's air force just before the Iraq War.
    4) They're considering a sale. North Korea perhaps?

    The US could intervene, but it needs a stronger and unified opposition, a plan, and an exit strategy.

    I'm not sure that the low-intensity strategy that worked in Libya can work here. Assad is far stronger and the opposition generally weaker, and a high-intensity strategy like Iraq terrifies military planners and the White House.

    We also have to deal with Iran and Russia who are both patrons of Syria and will stump any attempts to intervene through the Security Council.
     
  7. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    #7
    At this point, even the US can't do anything to make Assad back down. You don't make deals with crazy, you cease all contact and let them see how far they can and will go. The international community is smart about this because they've dealt with these situations before and know that action causes reaction and could cause more problems in and outside of Syria.
     
  8. macrumors 68000

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #8
    Assad will use chemical weapons to squash the rebellion, of that I have no doubt.

    How the world reacts will set the stage for the next act of aggression.

    I'm predicting nothing but UN sanctions, political chest-thumping and posturing will result, and this will of course strengthen the resolve of the next regime that wishes to suppress revolution.

    I'm tired of the US being the World Police and have said so many times. Just don't expect us to come in and clean it all up later.

    I also think we should have really made Iraq about oil, and kept control over production and distribution until the full cost of the war was recovered. We of course have no will to do something like that, so instead Iraq sells oil where it wants, and we pay the bill for freeing them from tyranny.
     
  9. macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #9
    Assad's trying to maintain power and because he's a ruthless bastard, he'll do anything to maintain that. Like Saddam Hussein, Assad may miscalculate, but he's not crazy.

    If there's a threat of outside intervention that cannot be contained by the Russian intransigence then Assad may back down from using chemical weapons. If, however, the world community continues to shy away, the Syrians should get under cover and hope.
     
  10. macrumors demi-god

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #10
    It's late so I might be misreading this, but I feel like you are saying the U.S. shouldn't intervine militarily in other countries unless it's to take over their oil supply and that somehow the Iraqi's owe the U.S. money for invading Iraq. Was I asleep when civil war in Iraq broke out as rebels rose up against Saddam asked the U.S. to help them bring democracy to their country?

    I feel like this is a scene from some cliched mob film where a gangster busts up a store then makes the store owner pay a mob-owned contractor to come in and repair the damage the mob caused.
     
  11. macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Old York
    #11
    I take small comfort in how consistently wrong you are about pretty much everything you ever voice an opinion over.
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #12
    Since you and I see everything from completely different point of view, I don't expect you to comprehend anything I say anyway.

    No skin off my nose.

    ----------

    I was being sarcastic, however the US has benefitted only tangentially from what we have done in the gulf, and the critics continue to say that we went to war for oil - which clearly we did not. We didn't get the oil, the Iraqi people did.

    We did not have the right strategy in the region however, and it will bite us.

    The tribal chiefs in the region understand and respect strength. We started out in a position of strength, however we are ending in a position of weakness, running with our collective tails tucked between our legs.

    The result? The new bully will take over - whoever that turns out to be - and we will likely stand back with the rest of the hand wringers and watch.

    Back on topic, we will do nothing when Assad decides to drop serin gas shells on his own people. Sure, Syria will be booted off the Security Council and Clinton and Obama will call for severe international sanctions, but really, we will do nothing of value.
     
  13. macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #13
    :confused:

    Her comprehension is obviously ace.

    Perhaps you meant to say 'agree with', and who could blame her.
     
  14. macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #14
    How can you say that? The Obama administration wrapped up a terribly mismanaged effort in Iraq, surged troops into the country where we should have been focused in the first place, sent troops into Pakistan to actually kill the reason we were there, and has eliminated the al qaeda leadership all over the region. Don't forget Egypt and Libya. Just because we didn't invade and try to "nation build" like a certain foolish predecessor (cough cough), does not mean this administration has no stomach for "boots on the ground."

    It is a mistake to think we need to send tens of thousands of troops when we can accomplish our goals with far less risk to our men and women in uniform. (see Libya/Egypt)
     
  15. macrumors 6502

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #15
    Perhaps, but I have to ask the question...why now? Why not do something like that much earlier? Why let it go on for so long and cause so much damage to so many cities. It seems to make no sense to wait.
     
  16. thread starter Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #16
    Thinking that he could win maybe?

    Because if he does this, things get serious for the international community.
     
  17. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #17
    If Assad does use chemical weapons. And the Pentagon is saying there is no evidence he is I believe there will not be american boots on the ground there because the US military has become quit good at using drones etc..

    Now as for Israel.. That's anybody's guess.
     
  18. thread starter Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #18
    Why would Israel be involved at all?
     
  19. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #19
    Iran has been arming the Palestinians by way of Syria for a long time.

    It's my opinion that if Israel saw the US start using drones and special ops in Syria it would give them an excuse to potentially invade Syria. Especially if Assad started using chemical weapons. Syria has rockets that can reach Israel very easily. They already lobbed a couple of rockets into Syria during the last little spat.
     
  20. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan
    #20
    Nonsense. If it comes to chemical weapons, the U.S. will go the Libya route - just bomb the @#$%! out of the military. It's not ideal, but it's better than boots on the ground.
     
  21. macrumors 68000

    Happybunny

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Location:
    's-Hertogenbosch Netherlands
    #21
    I think a far more interesting question is what does the West do if, the rebels in Syria capture large amounts of this Sarin Gas.
    If the Assad falls these weapons will be in the hands of well, I don't think that anyone really knows.
     
  22. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Ireland
    #22
    Is that supposed to be via Turkey, Iraq or the sea?

    I gather Iran is arming the Syrian government via Iraq at the moment. Would have thought the US had enough pull in Iraq to stop that but I guess not.
     
  23. macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #23
    Or someone could just give Seal Team 6 a call on the phone.

    The Red one.
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #24
    There's a vast difference between comprehension and agreement.

    If the Syrians launch a sarin gas attack, the US response should include air strikes against the mixing facilities, airfields, and Scuds and SS-21s. The bigger problem will be stopping the use of artillery shells.

    I would expect that special forces are already in Syria trying to tag the stockpiles as they're moved and putting together target lists.
     
  25. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #25
    Well there's a good chance we are about to find out ..

    The Syrian military is prepared to use chemical weapons against its own people and is awaiting final orders from President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told NBC News on Wednesday.

    The military has loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped onto the Syrian people from dozens of fighter-bombers, the officials said.


    http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/...-into-bombs-military-awaits-assads-order?lite
     

Share This Page