Does anyone care what happens in Syria?

[8timechamps]

I thought the UN/US finally took action in Libya because of the killing of citizens. Granted, there was a resistance 'in place', which there isn't (at least not to the same degree) in Syria. I don't think the US needs to intervene, but wouldn't it be nice to see someone else (or a group of someone elses) step up and help the folks of Syria? I'm talking about the average Syrian, not the military or government.

By the way, sanctions are worthless. When will we learn?

[ouwasp]

Something that caused me to sit up and pay attention was a report that the US was considering contingency plans for securing Syria's chemical weapon depots. Apparently, Syria has one of the largest stockpiles of Chem munitions in the world, located in some 50 different sites. The fear is the rebels could get ahold of them, and pass them along to the Hezzbollah (sp?) thugs that routinely lob shells into Israel...

Can you imagine how the Jews might react to Phosgene gas shells being shot into Tel Aviv?

The report said up to 75,000 US troops might be required to secure the weapons in a worst-case scenario. Now that would be **** duty, probably being shot at by both the rebels and the Syrian army! A perfect case for why the US should not be looked upon as the world's policeman. Unless some of thos mooslem terrorists plan on using the poison against a US target... which they probably would. <sigh>

The Arab League is just so much hot air, or they would get control of this situation. But I doubt they truly care about the general pop of Syria.

[ouwasp]

Kinda proud of Hillary... she actually came out and called the lack of action in the Useless Nations by Red China and Russia "despicable". These was a 70 nation summit regarding the Syrian crisis in Tunisia today... apparently a lot of hand-wringing and good intentions were proclaimed.

But I don't think the US public really cares much.

[cccasooner2]

l
Something that caused me to sit up and pay attention was a report that the US was considering contingency plans for securing Syria's chemical weapon depots. Apparently, Syria has one of the largest stockpiles of Chem munitions in the world, located in some 50 different sites. The fear is the rebels could get ahold of them, and pass them along to the Hezzbollah (sp?) thugs that routinely lob shells into Israel...

Can you imagine how the Jews might react to Phosgene gas shells being shot into Tel Aviv?

The report said up to 75,000 US troops might be required to secure the weapons in a worst-case scenario. Now that would be **** duty, probably being shot at by both the rebels and the Syrian army! A perfect case for why the US should not be looked upon as the world's policeman. Unless some of thos mooslem terrorists plan on using the poison against a US target... which they probably would. <sigh>

The Arab League is just so much hot air, or they would get control of this situation. But I doubt they truly care about the general pop of Syria.

So, I guess what you're saying is that we knew about the Syrian stockpile of weapons of mass destruction all along and averted our eyes. Wow, I guess we are the evil empire.

[soonercruiser]

Look at the current rioting in Afghanistan over some book burnings!
I fear we cannot do much for the Muslim world.
No good deed will go unpunished.

I regret that we are probably headed for "the Big One"!

[AlboSooner]

The US can do no good in the Moslem world. Those people conjure up all kind of conspiracies to nullify any good will act by the West.
I feel bad for Syria, but this is their fight.

[SicEmBaylor]

I could not possibly care less about what happens in Syria.

[8timechamps]

Funny how inaction led us to where we are today.

[IGotNoTiming]

Funny how inaction led us to where we are today.

Maybe recently, but to say we havent been involved in the middle east is laughable. The biggest stabilizing factor in that region used to be Iraq. We wiped them out. The dominoes have since fallen. Iraq was a political war at BEST. We are seeing the consequences of OUR actions unfold now. None of this would be happening had we not invaded and completely destroted the infrastructure of that country.

[SoonerProphet]

Funny how inaction led us to where we are today.

So we should have funneled more arms to the "rebel" groups fighting Assad? Deployed our armed forces to help ISIS achieve even further territorial gains? I don't get how our actions would have helped the situation in any way.

[BoulderSooner79]

Funny how inaction led us to where we are today.

We have been active in the middle east for decades and it never turns out as intended - at least in the long run. Iran would be the biggest stabilizing power in the region if we had not done that whole "Shah" thing. Now the biggest stabilizing power is the Saudis and the Sunni populous there hates our guts. If the royal family falls (and we help prop them), it will be hard to point to a muslim friend in the region.

[olevetonahill]

Didnt much care then, Dont much care NOW.

[8timechamps]

Maybe recently, but to say we havent been involved in the middle east is laughable. The biggest stabilizing factor in that region used to be Iraq. We wiped them out. The dominoes have since fallen. Iraq was a political war at BEST. We are seeing the consequences of OUR actions unfold now. None of this would be happening had we not invaded and completely destroted the infrastructure of that country.

I'm talking specifically about Syria. Look at the date this thread was started.

I'm certainly not arguing that the situation is Iraq is a result of our ousting of Sadam. However, ISIS was a growing problem two years ago. We did nothing one way, or the other when we should have.

[8timechamps]

So we should have funneled more arms to the "rebel" groups fighting Assad? Deployed our armed forces to help ISIS achieve even further territorial gains? I don't get how our actions would have helped the situation in any way.

We either should have conducted the airstrikes that were planned, and/or provided more support to the rebel groups.

Doesn't matter much now, because it looks like we are going to do that now. And no, I'm not a proponent of sending US troops, but unless we really support those fighting ISIS on the ground, airstrikes aren't going to do much.

[8timechamps]

We have been active in the middle east for decades and it never turns out as intended - at least in the long run. Iran would be the biggest stabilizing power in the region if we had not done that whole "Shah" thing. Now the biggest stabilizing power is the Saudis and the Sunni populous there hates our guts. If the royal family falls (and we help prop them), it will be hard to point to a muslim friend in the region.

We shouldn't be the world's police force, but we are and have been for a long time. The residents of the region should stand up and get their **** together, but they won't.

I think our actions in the middle east (not the second gulf war) have done a lot to prevent terrorist activity from reaching our shores, but I won't argue that things have ended up as intended.

[8timechamps]

15 years ago, nobody (outside of some in the intelligence community) knew, or cared about Al Queda. Even the folks that knew didn't take enough action to prevent what eventually occurred.

ISIS makes Al Queda look like a girl scout troop. They are far more organized, financed and radicalized than Al Queda was in their heyday. They also make no bones about their intent.

Maybe action in Syria two years ago wouldn't have squashed them, but it would have slowed their progress. Oh well, hindsight is 20/20.

[SoonerProphet]

So let me get this straight, bombing Assad's government forces would have stopped ISIS gains in the Levant and Iraq? How did you reach that conclusion? I think it has been pretty obvious that our assistance to FSA or other rebel groups has in fact fallen into the hands of ISIS.

[BoulderSooner79]

So let me get this straight, bombing Assad's government forces would have stopped ISIS gains in the Levant and Iraq? How did you reach that conclusion? I think it has been pretty obvious that our assistance to FSA or other rebel groups has in fact fallen into the hands of ISIS.

^This. It's a fools errand to try to assist the anti-Assad rebels because we cannot control what happens to any arms or other supplies once they are delivered. That was true 2 years ago and it is still true today. I've read some analyst proposing that we vet the opposition and only arm the moderate rebels that are truly in it just to overthrow Assad and install a western friendly government. That task is futile in itself in the midst of the chaos over there. But even if we correctly identify this "friendly" rebels, ISIS would swoop in and lop off a few "friendly" heads and take all the arms/supplies/money that we sent over there. Those weapons would end up killing Americans or our allies. If we were being honest, propping up Assad is more in our best interest than aiding the rebels - at least short term. But that's the long term trap we have often fallen for in the past.

I'm no Obama supporter on foreign policy, but in this case, being careful and pragmatic is warranted. We need the the countries over there that still have functioning governments to feel the heat and worry about keeping their own power intact. If they think we are going to swoop in and save the day, they'll just let us spent the money and lives. If they really feel threatened, they will get off their arsess and do something. We saw that in Irag with the Turks and Iranians.

But alas, I feel the slippery slope coming from pressure to get more involved. I hope we just stay with the air power thing and work deals with groups on the ground to help identify targets. And I *really* hope we round up a long list of allies to make this a true multinational effort and not a US effort with token support.

[SoonerProphet]

^This. It's a fools errand to try to assist the anti-Assad rebels because we cannot control what happens to any arms or other supplies once they are delivered. That was true 2 years ago and it is still true today. I've read some analyst proposing that we vet the opposition and only arm the moderate rebels that are truly in it just to overthrow Assad and install a western friendly government. That task is futile in itself in the midst of the chaos over there. But even if we correctly identify this "friendly" rebels, ISIS would swoop in and lop off a few "friendly" heads and take all the arms/supplies/money that we sent over there. Those weapons would end up killing Americans or our allies. If we were being honest, propping up Assad is more in our best interest than aiding the rebels - at least short term. But that's the long term trap we have often fallen for in the past.[\QUOTE]

Couple of reports have been released the last few days discussing various weapons we gave to moderates forces only to end up in hands of ISIS. In addition to info that FSA forces sold the journalist Sotloff to them. Don't exactly sound like good dudes. Back in 81 daddy Assad wrecked the town of Hama and effectively ended the Muslim Brotherhoods rebellion.

[QUOTE]I'm no Obama supporter on foreign policy, but in this case, being careful and pragmatic is warranted. We need the the countries over there that still have functioning governments to feel the heat and worry about keeping their own power intact. If they think we are going to swoop in and save the day, they'll just let us spent the money and lives. If they really feel threatened, they will get off their arsess and do something. We saw that in Irag with the Turks and Iranians.

But alas, I feel the slippery slope coming from pressure to get more involved. I hope we just stay with the air power thing and work deals with groups on the ground to help identify targets. And I *really* hope we round up a long list of allies to make this a true multinational effort and not a US effort with token support.

No doubt it is time to seriously consider arming the Kurds to the teeth and having operators along side peshmerga. Also time to warn the Turks, you want political Islamist government, cool, adios and good luck. And the KSA can be toppled and all them backward *** clowns can sweat it out.

Slippery slope indeed, the usual threat inflation crowd is in full throated fearmonger mode.

[ouwasp]

My son and I watched BHO last night. We also watched the follow up analysis on Fox. Son is 21 and has often talked about joining the army. We went to the recruiters last May. He's tossing it around. Now he's more interested in the Nat'l Guard. The infantry, of all things.

Last night we watched the news and I gave Son a quick run-down of the cesspool that is the ME. The petro situation. We talked about the thousands of servicemen maimed and killed in the past 13 yrs fighting radical mooslems...and what have we gained? More battles to be fought. An implacable enemy that will only be dealt with in death, which they welcome.

Our country needs young men like my son. But we need them alive and well. Not wasted in the ME.