Aleppo on brink of collapse; no sign of U.S. action.

aaronvan

Suspended
Original poster
Dec 21, 2011
1,349
9,287
República Cascadia
That is the CNN crawler as Poppy Harlow (great name) interviews a parade of forign policy experts on the impending collapse Aleppo who are attempting to shame Obama into "action," whatever that means. CNN has become of necon's and liberal interventionist's channel of choice. Very interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cfedu and jkcerda

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,571
Texas
That is the CNN crawler as Poppy Harlow (great name) interviews a parade of forign policy experts on the impending collapse Aleppo who are attempting to shame Obama into "action," whatever that means. CNN has become of necon's and liberal interventionist's channel of choice. Very interesting.
Do not intervene there, please.
[doublepost=1475261036][/doublepost]
hope he stays OUT of it, let Assad win and bring peace to the area.
Unfortunately I think that after the elections Obama will intervene. Worse, if HRC is elected she will use Syria as a proxy theater of war with Russia.
 

maxsix

Suspended
Jun 28, 2015
3,102
3,683
Western Hemisphere
Hussein can't even run the government he's responsible for. Having neutered the USA, the sad little man is living off the emotional satisfaction he gets watching citizens and refugees attacking police.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer

NT1440

macrumors G5
May 18, 2008
12,141
14,010
Hussein can't even run the government he's responsible for. Having neutered the USA, the sad little man is living off the emotional satisfaction he gets watching citizens and refugees attacking police.
What in ****s name are you talking about? When did the US annex Syria? How is the US responsible for the Syrian government?

You really are something else.
 

Technarchy

macrumors 604
May 21, 2012
6,747
4,885
If Obama and Clinton weren't propping up ISIS rebels in Syria, Assad would have restored order years ago.

The globalists and corporatists are going to have to come to terms with there being no looting of Syrian natural resources to make a profit.
 

aaronvan

Suspended
Original poster
Dec 21, 2011
1,349
9,287
República Cascadia
If Obama and Clinton weren't propping up ISIS rebels in Syria, Assad would have restored order years ago.

The globalists and corporatists are going to have to come to terms with there being no looting of Syrian natural resources to make a profit.
Exactly. Obama and Hillary have prolonged the civil war for years and the result is over 400,000 deaths.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,571
Texas
If the US gets involved in Syria we are in serious trouble. It's going to cost a lot of American (and non-American) lives, money, and it would cause a total collapse of the region. It would prompt Russians to act, probably followed by Turkey and Iraq. Israel would have to be also ready for action, all while ISIS will try to provoke as many nations as possible.
Lord, I can't even begin to think what is going to happen there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

Raid

macrumors 68020
Feb 18, 2003
2,144
3,936
Toronto
I though it was lack of "boots on the ground" that was the problem...the Americans wanted to support the democratic uprising, but republicans (now tired of the Afghan and Iraqi wars they started) refused to put more troops into combat.

The Russians are now the ones bombing the hell out of Aleppo and killing the babies.
Don't forget the caption
It happened it's about time people dealt with it... it's now close to 100 years ago. Also it's funny they photoshopped the eyes
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,041
Criminal Mexi Midget
I though it was lack of "boots on the ground" that was the problem...the Americans wanted to support the democratic uprising, but republicans (now tired of the Afghan and Iraqi wars they started) refused to put more troops into combat.

The Russians are now the ones bombing the hell out of Aleppo and killing the babies.
It happened it's about time people dealt with it... it's now close to 100 years ago. Also it's funny they photoshopped the eyes
we have no ****ing business there, Libya was an amazing cluster **** and this will be no different.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,571
Texas
I though it was lack of "boots on the ground" that was the problem...the Americans wanted to support the democratic uprising, but republicans (now tired of the Afghan and Iraqi wars they started) refused to put more troops into combat.

The Russians are now the ones bombing the hell out of Aleppo and killing the babies.
It happened it's about time people dealt with it... it's now close to 100 years ago. Also it's funny they photoshopped the eyes
Don't you think that a proxy war US-Russia would cause many more babies to die?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

Raid

macrumors 68020
Feb 18, 2003
2,144
3,936
Toronto
we have no ****ing business there, Libya was an amazing cluster **** and this will be no different.
You can say that for a lot of conflicts like the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Grenada, Afghanistan (the 1980's Proxy war), Iraq II, Afghanistan II the search for Bin Laden... It doesn't split along party lines

Don't you think that a proxy war US-Russia would cause many more babies to die?
People have been dying, bombings aren't bringing peace, and the cancer that is growing in Syria is now called Daesh. The UN security council is broken as most of the "players" in Syira are on the counsel and a 4 out of 5 decision is impossible.

You should all have a look at why Russia is so interested in supporting Assad.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,571
Texas
You can say that for a lot of conflicts like the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Grenada, Afghanistan (the 1980's Proxy war), Iraq II, Afghanistan II the search for Bin Laden... It doesn't split along party lines

People have been dying, bombings aren't bringing peace, and the cancer that is growing in Syria is now called Daesh. The UN security council is broken as most of the "players" in Syira are on the counsel and a 4 out of 5 decision is impossible.

You should all have a look at why Russia is so interested in supporting Assad.
You have to realize that you can't destroy Daesh without Syria's cooperation. You can't have the best of both worlds. You either have Assad and a stable Syria, or Daesh. Otherwise you have a bad war that will go on forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cfedu and jkcerda

Raid

macrumors 68020
Feb 18, 2003
2,144
3,936
Toronto
You have to realize that you can't destroy Daesh without Syria's cooperation. You can't have the best of both worlds. You either have Assad and a stable Syria, or Daesh. Otherwise you have a bad war that will go on forever.
So you're saying the choice is either tyranny or terror for Syria? The war can't go on forever, they'll run out of people to bomb eventually.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,041
Criminal Mexi Midget
You can say that for a lot of conflicts like the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Grenada, Afghanistan (the 1980's Proxy war), Iraq II, Afghanistan II the search for Bin Laden... It doesn't split along party lines

People have been dying, bombings aren't bringing peace, and the cancer that is growing in Syria is now called Daesh. The UN security council is broken as most of the "players" in Syira are on the counsel and a 4 out of 5 decision is impossible.

You should all have a look at why Russia is so interested in supporting Assad.
1000'S DYING & MILLIONS displaced after the Libya mess, WHEN are we going to learn? WHO gets to keep Assad weapons should we kill/depose him? WHO got Kaddafy's? all we are doing is making more ****ing terrorist
[doublepost=1475269654][/doublepost]
So you're saying the choice is either tyranny or terror for Syria? The war can't go on forever, they'll run out of people to bomb eventually.
HOW are they going to run out of people when WE arm and TRAIN the rebels heading there? did the slaughter end when Kadaffy was killed? NOPE we still have people fleeing that mess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cfedu

Raid

macrumors 68020
Feb 18, 2003
2,144
3,936
Toronto
1000'S DYING & MILLIONS displaced after the Libya mess, WHEN are we going to learn?.
I don't know when the US is going to learn... it's been going on for almost 70(?) years now and the play-book and results haven't changed much. I used to say the UN should handle messes like this, but they've fallen into a trap of their own making.

You can't bring peace to a region by flying a jet over it and dropping thousands of tonnes of bombs (not Russia, not the US). You need to get in there with a multinational force; boots on the ground, eyes and ears open, and let them know that this is a temporary measure to restore peace and not for profit.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,571
Texas
So you're saying the choice is either tyranny or terror for Syria? The war can't go on forever, they'll run out of people to bomb eventually.
I am saying that it's a bad situation.
1) Syria is a sovereign nation, recognized by the UN and the international community. If it says that it can deal with Daesh and no US help is needed, does the US have a right to attack it point blank?
2) If you put boots on the ground you would have to put them in Iraq, and maybe Israel. That would bring Iraq in the equation which would be intolerable for both Syria and Iran. It might also cause political mayhem in Iraq itself.
3) If you put boots on the ground without Syria's request, AND Syria calls Russia to help - as it is happening - Russia will have to engage American troops which at that point would be invaders of a sovereign country.
4) There is no way to fight on two fronts (Daesh and Syria) while at the same time fighting the proxy war with Russia while keeping stability in the region.
5) Fighting in Syria would cause relaxation over Iran, which means that once the US is tangled in the messy war there would be no way for the US to enforce the nuclear agreement signed by Kerry. Iran would have just to wait a couple of months before it could start the program back, with the particular that they are richer while the US AND Russia would be unable to threaten them. No government in its right mind would be open to fighting in both Syria and Iran (even a no-fly zone would be problematic).
5b) if US is fighthing in Syria agains Syrian troops+Daesh, Russia could be seize the moment and conquest Ukraine in a weekend, causing a big European crisis. At the same time, North Korea could provoke South Korea (although China would likely intervene).

No way I am open to this.

 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda