• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How can a vote against a Syrian STRIKE not be a vote for Assad & Putin?

Right wing you must have me confused with someone else . Hussein killed a lot of people like genocide was about to go out of style ( sort of like now ) Syria how is it a threat to the U.S Obama said and as well as McCain They will be intervening in any way as they possible can ( or so they say ) . WMD it is still is a excuse to intervene .

What is with people with Iraq you treat it as the most important thing or a bad thing for the wrong reasons America in the first war Messed up . Incented a rebellion with Hussein and said they were to support them but did not a Angry Hussein started to slaughter the people ( and then some ) who went against him . Dropping Napalm to his people that is a weapon of mass destruction . The second war was almost Justified it was fixing the mistakes of a past president who set the motion to action . Why would we support a 10 year invasion to get rid of a dictator who was committing a genocide we set in motion . Err I don't know.


Hussein used a poisonous gas to kill his people and a lot more than 1249 died

Saddam gassed his people in 1988 ...sending the Calvary in 2003 is a wee bit late wasn't it?
The Iraq war was a manufactured war ....a far different scenario from what's currently happening in Syria right now.

Yes I know Bush has his minions out there still trying to rewrite history and his terrible blunder in Iraq!
But I can tell you this ....the more twist, spin and equivocation the right-wing tries in not admitting and owning that blunder...the less likely they will be to ever regain the WH.
Iraq was a disaster ...a manufactured war that's owned by the right-wing and the neocons ....and nobody cares if you've worked hard to co-opt a new label today ...i.e. TEA PURTY!!

That blunder should never be compared to the Syrian event.
 
My God, are you deliberately trying to make your post hard to read? Look up 'ellipsis' and learn to use it.
Dick Cheney? What? We're talking about missiles destroying the Syrian air power, possibly targeting Assad.
And if you think Arab militants will learn from an American military action that they shouldn't screw around with America, well, God bless you. Those were Saudi Arabians who flew those planes on 9/11.

Get out of the fox news bubble and back into reality ...will you? The one or two people in Syria right now who want to fly a plane into a US building right now ....don't give a dam whether or not we attack Assad...good grief!
 
Saddam gassed his people in 1988 ...sending the Calvary in 2003 is a wee bit late wasn't it?
The Iraq war was a manufactured war ....a far different scenario from what's currently happening in Syria right now.

Yes I know Bush has his minions out there still trying to rewrite history and his terrible blunder in Iraq!
But I can tell you this ....the more twist, spin and equivocation the right-wing tries in not admitting and owning that blunder...the less likely they will be to ever regain the WH.
Iraq was a disaster ...a manufactured war that's owned by the right-wing and the neocons ....and nobody cares if you've worked hard to co-opt a new label today ...i.e. TEA PURTY!!

That blunder should never be compared to the Syrian event.

Iraq was a blunder. A blunder that many,many Democrats,including the 2016 Democratic nominee voted for.
We are talking about now,not 10 years ago unfortunately. Iraq being a mistake does not have anything to do with now making another in Syria. Obama is the president,although frankly with him hiding out during tough times I wonder if it's McCain or Graham.
One more thing. Obama is the president now. He can't just be around when he wants to honor a WNBA team or a Super Bowl champ from 1972,but even during the tough times.
 
Saddam gassed his people in 1988 ...sending the Calvary in 2003 is a wee bit late wasn't it?
The Iraq war was a manufactured war ....a far different scenario from what's currently happening in Syria right now.

Yes I know Bush has his minions out there still trying to rewrite history and his terrible blunder in Iraq!
But I can tell you this ....the more twist, spin and equivocation the right-wing tries in not admitting and owning that blunder...the less likely they will be to ever regain the WH.
Iraq was a disaster ...a manufactured war that's owned by the right-wing and the neocons ....and nobody cares if you've worked hard to co-opt a new label today ...i.e. TEA PURTY!!

That blunder should never be compared to the Syrian event.

As an avowed neoconservative I always find this morbidly humorous. It was a despicable manufactured war to topple Saddam in 2003, but it would have been a noble campaign if it had been conducted under a different banner? At the end of the day the result was the accomplishment of an objective that you seem to be advancing--the destruction of the Baath regime and the overthrow of Saddam. If you are a humanitarian interventionist feel free to critique the reasons the administration prioritized, the conduct of the war itself and the plans for the occupation period, but I don't think you can criticize the basic decision to overthrow Saddam and not sound hypocritical.
 
People in the US can slice and dice and equivocate all they want. But the world ..especially those in the region (including Israel) will see an American congress vote against a STRIKE against Syria as a vote siding with Vladimir and Assad.

There simply is no other way to look at it ...especially if your in Israel right walking around with Gas Masks in your bag!

In fact I endorse McCain's idea to not just hit Assad..but to take steps to take him out. Hit his weapons cache...and arm the rebels to go in and finish the job!

I also feel if congress vote no for this STRIKE ...Obama should exercise his executive power ...and STRIKE Syria non the less.
He (Obama) isn't looking for another term...and when the history books look at this fiasco ..I am sure this will clearly be the right decision.

Then you are pro-Alquaida. That's the decision you have to make; do you support a distasteful dictator or the terrorists that we've been at war with since 9-11. (one of the groups at least).

I'd say it's better to wash your hands of the subject and let these people sort out the issue, and maybe can reestablish ties once the dust settles.
 
Iraq was a blunder. A blunder that many,many Democrats,including the 2016 Democratic nominee voted for.
We are talking about now,not 10 years ago unfortunately. Iraq being a mistake does not have anything to do with now making another in Syria. Obama is the president,although frankly with him hiding out during tough times I wonder if it's McCain or Graham.
One more thing. Obama is the president now. He can't just be around when he wants to honor a WNBA team or a Super Bowl champ from 1972,but even during the tough times.

Read my post again ....you can bend and twist ...you can drag whomever you want in the mix to try absolve and yourself from responsibility. Go ahead ...Bush did a great job of making up all sorts of ..one lines ...about that war while he was in the WH. But while Americans may have short memory ...what they won't forget is ...Iraq was a blunder ...and it's stamped with Bush face on it ....along with the right wing.

Keep trying to evade and run and duck ...you're fooling nobody about that blunder ...pal .....Bush and the right wing own that blunder. Had you guys fessed up and apologize for that war ...years ago ....things may be better for you now as far as your chances are for the WH. But no spin...no twist...no one-line ....no label change (TEA PURTY) is going to fool the American public.

Here's how pissed America and the world is with Iraq ....all the problems Obama have today with Syria ...is entirely because of bush and Iraq.

War weary means ....WE DON'T WANT ANOTHER IRAQ. That's what the people in UK are pissed about ...it's all about Iraq ...yes ...BUSH WAR!!
 
Then you are pro-Alquaida. That's the decision you have to make; do you support a distasteful dictator or the terrorists that we've been at war with since 9-11. (one of the groups at least).

I'd say it's better to wash your hands of the subject and let these people sort out the issue, and maybe can reestablish ties once the dust settles.

Your thinking is a like a guy who want's to be CEO of a company ...want's the big salary.....private jets...and golf membership ...but don't want the responsibility of actually making decisions. You want to be super-power of the world ...or not?
With great powers ...comes great responsibility.

Stand back and watching this carnage is how countries like Greece ...or Spain ..thinks ....quite happy being at the back of the pack following the leader.

If we take this tact enough times ...China will see this void to exploit ...and they should. They'll start stepping up ...and taking charge ....now do you understand why that's not a good tactic?
 
ahhh, yes... everything is righting itself again... the left is resuming it's traditional place as the interventionist warmongers, the right is criticizing the cost of the operation and it's stated goals....
 
Your thinking is a like a guy who want's to be CEO of a company ...want's the big salary.....private jets...and golf membership ...but don't want the responsibility of actually making decisions. You want to be super-power of the world ...or not?
With great powers ...comes great responsibility.

So, do you own a military weapons factory?? A military contracting company? An oil company? A big bank?

No? Then you don't benefit from this either.

Hey; if you want to align yourself with terrorists, that's your deal, just be honest about it.

You know, aiding and abetting an enemy during a time of war used to be called treason.

Stand back and watching this carnage is how countries like Greece ...or Spain ..thinks ....quite happy being at the back of the pack following the leader.

Well, if we weren't helping the terrorists, then Assad would have squashed this rebellion a while ago... Or it may not have even started.



If we take this tact enough times ...China will see this void to exploit ...and they should. They'll start stepping up ...and taking charge ....now do you understand why that's not a good tactic?

Good, let other people police the world... Just keep our troops here and if anyone ****s with us, then we just unleash a fury that would embarrass any would be attacker.

God help these stupid fools that actually believe they benefit from this neo-imperialism.
 
Many people keep asking ...why strike Syria...whats in it for us (America)?
Well you can't have it both ways ...you either lead, follow or get out of the way.

And when events like this happen and the US doesn't step up ....sooner or later someone else will. Let China for example start taking the lead on events like this and soon ...the US will become irrelevant.

You can't have it both ways ...you can't claim to be the world's force and the superpower ...and show off you dam selves all day...and when there's a situation you want to crawl in your hole!!

I select option three please...we get out of the way and let the people within that nation determine the course of their nation's future by themselves.

As for leaving a power vacuum? That's hyperbole because no one is stating that we ignore territorial aggresssion between sovereign nations. That's why we went into Iraq during the First Gulf War, their naked aggression against our "friend" Kuwait.

If China or Russia or anyone else invades a sovereign nation then we make a determination if our involvement is required by treaty, or as with Korea, by our membership in the UN and action authorized by a clear declaration of that international body. In either case we still get a declaration of war from Congress!

No one is seeking isolationism, just minimization of military interventionism.
 
Last edited:
These conflicts are largely Shiite against Sunni. Who is in charge of the government is meaningless. One side historically kills the other, unless there is firm control.

Yes it occurred to me in another thread too. What if all this is for Sunni's to be backed from the West and Shiites to be backed from Russia type of politics? What if all this is in fact groupation/categorization of people with religion to their supporters?

It would redraw ME maps. Not sure whether it would be a good thing? What do you guys think?
 
People in the US can slice and dice and equivocate all they want. But the world ..especially those in the region (including Israel) will see an American congress vote against a STRIKE against Syria as a vote siding with Vladimir and Assad.
There simply is no other way to look at it ...especially if your in Israel right walking around with Gas Masks in your bag!
In fact I endorse McCain's idea to not just hit Assad..but to take steps to take him out. Hit his weapons cache...and arm the rebels to go in and finish the job!
I also feel if congress vote no for this STRIKE ...Obama should exercise his executive power ...and STRIKE Syria non the less.
He (Obama) isn't looking for another term...and when the history books look at this fiasco ..I am sure this will clearly be the right decision.
Just like how if you opposed the invasion of Iraq that meant you loved Hussein and you wanted sharia law in the US. Totally makes sense.

Or is just silly on its face.
 
Yes, by the opposition.

Saddam did have WMD. We just didn't find it. All he had to do to keep us from attacking Iraq, was allow the UN inspectors to check the sites unhampered, and show disposition of the WMD he was known to have. In a post 9/11 world, we were doing our best to keep these weapons out of terrorists hands.

You do realize don't you, that one of Saddam's generals said much of Saddam's WMD went to Syria, right?

The chemical attacks in Syria, used by the rebels, could have been from Iraq.

We didn't invade iraq because of WMD.

We invaded to end iraq "support" of Al Qaeda after 9/11.
Bush said iraq, iran and north korea were the "axis of evil" and said iraq was involved in 9/11 and had ties to al qaeda.

Saudi nationals attack the u.s., We invade iraq. Perfect logic.

It was proven that iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and al qaeda had nothing to do with iraq.
bush then said said an attack would be to "diminish the threat of international terrorism". bush specifically said the purpose wasn't "regime change" at first.

Then the mission shifted to eliminating WMD. Colin Powell went to the u.n with some BS lies (yellow cake" uranium and centrifuges..etc..)and faked pictures and everyone was outraged about WMD.

When no WMD could be found the mission shifted to "regime change" (surprise!) and "promoting democracy" in iraq and the surrounding areas.

The real purpose, as it always is in the ME, is to keep the area destabilized so we can exert our "influence" in the area for political and economic reasons..
 
Last edited:
How has regime change supported by the US in Egypt and Libya worked out?

Egypt is moving on from democratically elected religious Sheria extremism (not expected huh?) and straight to secularism. Libya is not clear, have not heard much of it since Gadhaffi!
 
Syrian rebels were arrested on the Turkish border with canisters of sarin gas and we're 100% convinced it was the regime because???
Has Russia bothered to reveal their evidence for this yet? I know that they claimed it, but...
 
You do realize don't you, that one of Saddam's generals said much of Saddam's WMD went to Syria, right?
Do you realize that there's no evidence to support the WMD to Syria hypothesis?
 
From what I understand the 'planned' desired targets are anti-air missile defense batteries due to their value to Assad in preventing aerial intrusions. I also understand these are manned partially by Russians (as it is their equipment). It would seem plausible that if we do in fact target these RUSSIANS would possibly be killed...with CERTAIN ramifications. Does this sound remotely like a good idea?

One other question, is the enemy of my enemy my friend?

The only hope in all this and the only benefit that USA and allies may rely upon is that hopefully the majority of the population in Syria would recognize that fact in bold.
 
I feel like history repeating itself with the Iraq war McCain weapons of mass destruction rebels getting slaughtered in a mass murder kind of way .

If we strike we have to take out the guy once and for all or it will be like Hussein we made it worse by going their the first place and not stopping him for good because after that he started with burning down homes and people and bombing his people who rebelled against him .

Saddam was vicious in terrorizing and torturing his captives. You can see these now in Youtube.

Wonder if there are such videos that could be released if Assad moves away?
 
You do realize don't you, that one of Saddam's generals said much of Saddam's WMD went to Syria, right?
The chemical attacks in Syria, used by the rebels, could have been from Iraq.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/archives/18558-oil-food-scandal-3.html#post505838

The guy pimping the WMD to Syria story says that the United States' Defense Intelligence Agency thinks the story is B.S.


About Jack Shaw, Another Presenter at the Summit
Mr. Shaw said he acquired his intel about Iraq's WMD going to Syria from a "good friend" of Dick Cheney's and that this info was derided by the DIA as "Israeli disinformation." After the Shaw launched the story, the Fox news reported "it isn't clear how this person has the authority or the knowledge to speak on such a matter."

In the recent past, it seemed that Jack Shaw did some illegal and questionable things. But, then a DoD press release seemed to have cleared him. Subsequently, the exonerating press release had to be pulled because "information has become available that indicates it may not have been accurate at the time it was issued. The matter is under review to determine the facts and circumstances involving the information contained in the original release."
AFAICT, the DoD page revoking the exoneration was last updated 2005-08-25.

Coincidentally, the previously cited article about what prompted the FBI to investigate the actions of Mr. Shaw mentioned the port of Umm al Qasr. At the Summit, Mr. Shaw also mentioned port of Umm al Qasr. He said there were floodable storage areas in Qasr that had held WMD. He also said that in Umm al Qasr, the Soviets loaded Iraqi WMD onto ships so as to sink the weapons and possibly other untold evidence in the depths of the Indian Ocean.
19 Feb 2006 by Simon W. Moon


http://irrationallyinformed.com/aud...aelidisinfo.wav[about 53 mb]

Starting about 45 sec in he begins to talk about shopping the WMD to Syria story to the DIA. He says the DIA told him that the WMD to Syria thing is "Israeli disinformation."[around the 60 second mark] He then says that there was an effort to discredit him and the people associated with the story even though one of them was one of "the Vice Presidents very best friends." [around the two minute mark]


What the best info currently available re the WMD to Syria theory says.

Addendums to the Comprehensive Report of the Special Advisor to the DCI on Iraq’s WMD (pdf) page1 (page 4 of the pdf)
ISG formed a working group to investigate the possibility of the evacuation of WMD-related material from Iraq prior to the 2003 war. This group spent several months examining documents, interviewing former Iraqi officials , examining previous intelligence reports, and conducting some site investigations. The declining security situation limited and finally halted this investigation. The results remain inconclusive, but further investigation may be undertaken when
circumstances on the ground improve.
The investigation centered on the possibility that WMD materials were moved to Syria. As is obvious from other sections of the Comprehensive Report, Syria was involved in transactions and shipments of military and other material to Iraq in contravention of the UN sanctions. This indicated a flexibility with respect to international law and a strong willingness to work with Iraq—at least when there was considerable profit for those involved. Whether Syria received military items from Iraq for safekeeping or other reasons has yet to be determined. There was evidence of a discussion of possible WMD collaboration initiated by a Syrian security officer, and ISG received information about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved. In the judgment of the working group, these reports were sufficiently credible to merit further investigation.
ISG was unable to complete its investigation and is unable to rule out the possibility that WMD was evacuated to Syria before the war. It should be noted that no information from debriefing of Iraqis in custody supports this possibility. ISG found no senior policy, program, or intelligence officials who admitted any direct knowledge of such movement of WMD. Indeed, they uniformly denied any knowledge of residual WMD that could have been secreted to Syria.
Nevertheless, given the insular and compartmented nature of the Regime, ISG analysts believed there was enough evidence to merit further investigation.
It is worth noting that even if ISG had been able to fully examine all the leads it possessed, it is unlikely that conclusive information would have been found.
At best, barring discovery of original documentary evidence of the transfer, reports or sources may have been substantiated or negated, but firm conclusions on actual WMD movements may not be possible.
Based on the evidence available at present, ISG judged that it was unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place. However, ISG was unable to rule out unofficial movement of limited WMD-related materials.
Note that "WMD-related materials" WMDs



But as WMD to Syria devotees and Bigfoot devotees may be tempted to say, "Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence."
And of course, they're both right.
However, in the meantime, folks in the reality-based community have to deal with the facts that are available and make the best decisions in light of what's known.
And, based on the evidence available at present, the WMD to Syria transfer theory seems unlikely.
But, so does Bigfoot, so who's to say.​
 
You are a world away too,predicting what the "rebels"will do once they take over.
On a side note,I am white but seldom use air conditioning.

and telling americans what he thinks we should do...and making absolute statements about "cons" etc.
It appears that being a long distance away from and having never been to a place, but reading about it, somehow makes one an expert on u.s. politics, foreign relations, race relations and foreign policy. No seriously. it might be possible. :roll:
 
Many people keep asking ...why strike Syria...whats in it for us (America)?
Well you can't have it both ways ...you either lead, follow or get out of the way.

And when events like this happen and the US doesn't step up ....sooner or later someone else will. Let China for example start taking the lead on events like this and soon ...the US will become irrelevant.

You can't have it both ways ...you can't claim to be the world's force and the superpower ...and show off you dam selves all day...and when there's a situation you want to crawl in your hole!!

i'm ok with China taking the lead when it comes to global military police actions. let them spend fifty years figuring out what we already should have learned.

when this stuff started happening, why did no one ask Switzerland why it wasn't doing anything to stop it? where's the moral outrage that Finland isn't getting involved? how about Denmark? do you think they're upset right now that they are "irrelevant?"
 
A vote to take no action in another country's civil war is just that. Nothing else.

No matter what side the US would support there, it would be the wrong side to support.

Staying out is the best course of action.

It's not our fight. It's not a matter of US security. Syria is not a threat to the USofA.

It's not self-defense - therefore we should not get involved.

All one has to do is look at well over a decade of involvement in Afghanistan to know that we should stay the F out of countries like that.
 
Interesting how you believe such news. How do you know the people reporting this were honest? Propaganda is real, and without our own eyes on the situation, this is every bit as likely a complete orchestrated fabrication.

This is what we have. Having ones eyes near the situation may (under these circumstances) be just that! A pair of eyeballs on the area!

Deal with medial wars. Otherwise Debate Politics should financially support a high ranking spy to inform us specifically about developments there.
 
Read my post again ....you can bend and twist ...you can drag whomever you want in the mix to try absolve and yourself from responsibility. Go ahead ...Bush did a great job of making up all sorts of ..one lines ...about that war while he was in the WH. But while Americans may have short memory ...what they won't forget is ...Iraq was a blunder ...and it's stamped with Bush face on it ....along with the right wing.

Keep trying to evade and run and duck ...you're fooling nobody about that blunder ...pal .....Bush and the right wing own that blunder. Had you guys fessed up and apologize for that war ...years ago ....things may be better for you now as far as your chances are for the WH. But no spin...no twist...no one-line ....no label change (TEA PURTY) is going to fool the American public.

Here's how pissed America and the world is with Iraq ....all the problems Obama have today with Syria ...is entirely because of bush and Iraq.

War weary means ....WE DON'T WANT ANOTHER IRAQ. That's what the people in UK are pissed about ...it's all about Iraq ...yes ...BUSH WAR!!

I'm not evading anything. You are far too sensitive to any criticism of Obama. We are in the NOW. Obama is president. To still make excuses for something 10 years after because Obama is unable to make the case to the American people is beyond pathetic.
 
People in the US can slice and dice and equivocate all they want. But the world ..especially those in the region (including Israel) will see an American congress vote against a STRIKE against Syria as a vote siding with Vladimir and Assad.

There simply is no other way to look at it ...especially if your in Israel right walking around with Gas Masks in your bag!

In fact I endorse McCain's idea to not just hit Assad..but to take steps to take him out. Hit his weapons cache...and arm the rebels to go in and finish the job!

I also feel if congress vote no for this STRIKE ...Obama should exercise his executive power ...and STRIKE Syria non the less.
He (Obama) isn't looking for another term...and when the history books look at this fiasco ..I am sure this will clearly be the right decision.

So I presume you're OK with the murdering of Christians and Shia by the rebels?
 
Back
Top Bottom