Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Poll [48 votes]: US intervenes in Syria
  • Poll [48 votes]: US intervenes in Syria
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: US intervenes in Syria

Hooah

Poll: US intervenes in Syria  [closed]
Immediately:  19%
(9 Votes)
Very soon:  23%
(11 Votes)
If it gets worse:  48%
(23 Votes)
No chance:  10%
(5 Votes)
Total Votes: 48

Syria finally has them...and the rest of the world is on standby. Read the articles, see how deadly the neurotoxin Sarin is; Saddam used it in a single attack against his own people, and killed nearly 5000.

Do you think the US, or any other country should intervene?

  • 12.05.2012 6:08 PM PDT

Door Kickers Inc.

You didn't have to make a thread on this, since we're already kind of discussing that in the other thread that's on the front page.

OT: The US will more than likely intervene via NATO if and when Assad uses the chemical weapons.

  • 12.05.2012 6:09 PM PDT

Rustled Jimmies

While we should try to arm the rebels (secretly of course) I don't think we need to take the actions we took in Lybia

  • 12.05.2012 6:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Yup.

I don't approve of intervention.

  • 12.05.2012 6:11 PM PDT

Rustled Jimmies


Posted by: Sgt Mag1
You didn't have to make a thread on this, since we're already kind of discussing that in the other thread that's on the front page.

OT: The US will more than likely via NATO if and when Assad uses the chemical weapons.


I think by that time, it'll be a little late but I also think if they do there'll be other countries that join in

  • 12.05.2012 6:11 PM PDT

Hooah

Didn't bother to read the rest of the Flood. My bad.

The US definitely will not go through NATO; too much conglomerate indecision you have cultivating there. They may "advise" or "inform" NATO about their decision, but the our military would not respond well to working with other nations. Afghanistan is a perfect example as to why not.

[Edited on 12.05.2012 6:12 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 6:11 PM PDT

Door Kickers Inc.


Posted by: BuzzKill9009
While we should try to arm the rebels (secretly of course)
That's kind of hard when the rebels that are in Syria are nothing like the ones that were in Libya. To arm and supply a Syrian rebel faction, one would have to find the one Syrian rebel faction who is not Islamist, jihadist, authoritative, and who would be a perfect choice for who we'd like to run the new Syria. When you find that group, then we'll start arming them.

  • 12.05.2012 6:12 PM PDT

What's the difference between "immediately" and "very soon"?

  • 12.05.2012 6:13 PM PDT

Door Kickers Inc.


Posted by: Darth Malvagio
The US definitely will not go through NATO
Kid, we make NATO NATO.

too much conglomerate indecision you have cultivating there. You're thinking of the UN.

our military would not respond well to working with other nations. Afghanistan is a perfect example as to why not.History would tell us otherwise.

[Edited on 12.05.2012 6:14 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 6:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Co M4N
  • user homepage:

If they actually USE the weapons then yes by all means intervene. So I went with if it gets worse.

  • 12.05.2012 6:14 PM PDT

Rustled Jimmies


Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: BuzzKill9009
While we should try to arm the rebels (secretly of course)
That's kind of hard when the rebels that are in Syria are nothing like the ones that were in Libya. To arm and a Syrian rebel faction, one would have to find the one Syrian rebel faction who is not Islamist, jihadist, authoritative, and who would be a perfect choice for who we'd like to the new Syria. When you find that group, then we'll start arming them.


Any action we do take would be dangerous, and it is important that the right faction is chosen. hopefully we'll find the right faction soon

  • 12.05.2012 6:15 PM PDT

Hooah


Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: BuzzKill9009
While we should try to arm the rebels (secretly of course)
That's kind of hard when the rebels that are in Syria are nothing like the ones that were in Libya. To arm and supply a Syrian rebel faction, one would have to find the one Syrian rebel faction who is not Islamist, jihadist, authoritative, and who would be a perfect choice for who we'd like to run the new Syria. When you find that group, then we'll start arming them.


Ultimately, when you start talking about who the "perfect choice" is for an alliance, you're on shaky ground. There is no perfect choice, because that decision can always come back to bite us in the ass. The Mujahedin, once again in Afghanistan, are the prime example we can compare to. That said, we shouldn't support any militant group, regardless of their political affiliation. Let the people not just decide, but create their own group of their own values and ideals.

  • 12.05.2012 6:15 PM PDT

Door Kickers Inc.


Posted by: Darth Malvagio
Let the people not just decide, but create their own group of their own values and ideals.
But they do? The problem lies in finding said group who shares our values and ideals.

  • 12.05.2012 6:16 PM PDT

Hooah


Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: Darth Malvagio
The US definitely will not go through NATO
Kid, we make NATO NATO.

too much conglomerate indecision you have cultivating there. You're thinking of the UN.

our military would not respond well to working with other nations. Afghanistan is a perfect example as to why not.History would tell us otherwise.


NATO is a facade, like any other international organization. Not to be arrogant, but we know who wears the pants in the North Atlantic.

The UN, NATO, are all the result of human will and desire to do right by everyone; unfortunately that never turns out to be the end.

History tells us otherwise? What does it tell us? That nearly 11 years later, Afghanistan is no better off from an external/ international vantage point than it used to be?

  • 12.05.2012 6:18 PM PDT

Hooah


Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: Darth Malvagio
Let the people not just decide, but create their own group of their own values and ideals.
But they do? The problem lies in finding said group who shares our values and ideals.


It's not our ideals that we need to focus on, though. Our society has evolved more rapidly than anything in the middle east. The things that incur this speedy development are only just being introduced to this region; that said, they need the time to determine what political identity they want to join the international community with.

Eventually, they may develop a society that nearly perfectly models ours. Whether or not that is good/bad is another debate. But they need to figure that out for themselves, we can't spoonfeed them beliefs they aren't accustomed to; it's an acquired taste.

  • 12.05.2012 6:22 PM PDT

Door Kickers Inc.


Posted by: Darth Malvagio
NATO is a facade, like any other international organization. Not to be arrogant, but we know who wears the pants in the North Atlantic.
If you knew the history of NATO, you'd realize why the United States is in the military alliance and why we "wear the pants". We're still going to go through them, as a multilateral response is the best way to go in this situation.

The UN, NATO, are all the result of human will and desire to do right by everyone; unfortunately that never turns out to be the end.K

History tells us otherwise? What does it tell us? That nearly 11 years later, Afghanistan is no better off from an external/ international vantage point than it used to be?History tells us that we often work with other countries, and we do it quite well. World War 2, Korea, First Gulf War, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, War on Terror, Second Gulf War, Operation Ocean Shield, and most recently the intervention in Libya shows us that when we work multilaterally, we accomplish things.

  • 12.05.2012 6:26 PM PDT

Rustled Jimmies


Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: Darth Malvagio
NATO is a facade, like any other international organization. Not to be arrogant, but we know who wears the pants in the North Atlantic.
If you knew the history of NATO, you'd realize why the United States is in the military alliance and why we "wear the pants". We're still going to go through them, as a multilateral response is the best way to go in this situation.

The UN, NATO, are all the result of human will and desire to do right by everyone; unfortunately that never turns out to be the end.K

History tells us otherwise? What does it tell us? That nearly 11 years later, Afghanistan is no better off from an external/ international vantage point than it used to be?History tells us that we often work with other countries, and we do it quite well. World War 2, Korea, First Gulf War, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, War on , Second Gulf War, Operation Ocean Shield, and most recently the intervention in Libya shows us that when we work multilaterally, we accomplish things.


this

  • 12.05.2012 6:28 PM PDT

Door Kickers Inc.


Posted by: Darth Malvagio
It's not our ideals that we need to focus on, though.
This is gonna sound like a redneck saying this but, democracy and freedom are our ideals. Why should we not find the Syrian rebel faction aligned with these same ideals, and help them?

  • 12.05.2012 6:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Bungie doesn't like French on their site.


Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: Darth Malvagio
It's not our ideals that we need to focus on, though.
This is gonna sound like a redneck saying this but, democracy and freedom are our ideals. Why should we not find the Syrian rebel faction aligned with these same ideals, and help them?
They could turn out to be the bad guys - remember; we aided Osama against Russia..and what did Osama do to us a few years later? Yeah..If I were President, I wouldn't bother with Syria, we'er about to get out of another major war next year, I don't want us to get in ANOTHER major war. Ugh, I wish I could say more, but it goes into politics. :(

  • 12.05.2012 6:32 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Tom
USNSCC, E-3

The Line of Steel
Basically, it's a blog of mine that focuses on military and policy related issues. Feel free to bookmark it and PM me any ideas you have to improve its quality. I hope you enjoy it!


Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: Darth Malvagio
It's not our ideals that we need to focus on, though.
This is gonna sound like a redneck saying this but, democracy and freedom are our ideals. Why should we not find the Syrian rebel faction aligned with these same ideals, and help them?


That didn't sound redneck, it sounded logical.

  • 12.05.2012 6:32 PM PDT

Hooah


Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: Darth Malvagio
NATO is a facade, like any other international organization. Not to be arrogant, but we know who wears the pants in the North Atlantic.
If you knew the history of NATO, you'd realize why the United States is in the military alliance and why we "wear the pants". We're still going to go through them, as a multilateral response is the best way to go in this situation.

The UN, NATO, are all the result of human will and desire to do right by everyone; unfortunately that never turns out to be the end.K

History tells us otherwise? What does it tell us? That nearly 11 years later, Afghanistan is no better off from an external/ international vantage point than it used to be?History tells us that we often work with other countries, and we do it quite well. World War 2, Korea, First Gulf War, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, War on Terror, Second Gulf War, Operation Ocean Shield, and most recently the intervention in Libya shows us that when we work multilaterally, we accomplish things.


I'm fairly versed in NATO's history; however, the loose political affiliation that it attempts to bind us to is not enough to prevent any US interest with regard to military intervention. The premise of NATO relies on a joint defense should any one of the members be attacked by an outside force.

History also tells us that each nation has a military that operates in very different ways with many different standard operating procedures. I watched a group of Romanian soldiers park their whole 8-vehicle convoy in the middle of a dried riverbed, assuming it provided them the most significant amount of cover and concealment for our training exercise. We strongly advised against it; it rained. Joint operations are wonderful when one country takes the wheel, and the other countries properly support.

  • 12.05.2012 6:34 PM PDT

Door Kickers Inc.


Posted by: iRdACheef619

Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: Darth Malvagio
It's not our ideals that we need to focus on, though.
This is gonna sound like a redneck saying this but, democracy and freedom are our ideals. Why should we not find the Syrian rebel faction aligned with these same ideals, and help them?
They could turn out to be the bad guys - remember; we aided Osama against Russia..and what did Osama do to us a few years later? Yeah..If I were President, I wouldn't bother with Syria, we'er about to get out of another major war next year, I don't want us to get in ANOTHER major war. Ugh, I wish I could say more, but it goes into politics. :(
We never gave any military or financial aid to Bin Laden during the Soviet War in Afghanistan. We gave money to Afghan mujahideen via the Pakistani ISI, not Arab mujahideen, Afghan, locals.

Besides, Bin Laden had his own mujahideen group whom he funded with his own personal wealth.

[Edited on 12.05.2012 6:36 PM PST]

  • 12.05.2012 6:34 PM PDT

Just dance 4- Lindsey Stirling

Dead-body-ologist at The U.S. Army 18th Medical Command

Posted by: iRdACheef619

Posted by: Sgt Mag1

Posted by: Darth Malvagio
It's not our ideals that we need to focus on, though.
This is gonna sound like a redneck saying this but, democracy and freedom are our ideals. Why should we not find the Syrian rebel faction aligned with these same ideals, and help them?
They could turn out to be the bad guys - remember; we aided Osama against Russia..and what did Osama do to us a few years later? Yeah..If I were President, I wouldn't bother with Syria, we'er about to get out of another major war next year, I don't want us to get in ANOTHER major war. Ugh, I wish I could say more, but it goes into politics. :(
It's a risk and reward business, doesn't mean you have to watch the world burn.

  • 12.05.2012 6:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Bungie doesn't like French on their site.


Posted by: Darth Malvagio
Syria finally has them...and the rest of the world is on standby. Read the articles, see how deadly the neurotoxin Sarin is; Saddam used it in a single attack against his own people, and killed nearly 5000.

Do you think the US, or any other country should intervene?
Should? Yes - just not us, maybe NATO? If he does use the missiles, Obama already said, or at least hinted at putting boots in Syria.

  • 12.05.2012 6:35 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2