• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Should we launch an simultaneous attack on Syria and Iran?

Should we launch a simultaneous attack against Syria and Iran?

  • Yes, there aiding the insurgency, it's clear as day.

    Votes: 5 23.8%
  • No, let's make the same mistake as we did with Cambodia in Vietnam.

    Votes: 16 76.2%

  • Total voters
    21
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Now that elections have taken place and the constitution has been ratified in Iraq and considering the fact that intel suggest that much of the logistical and financial support to the Iraqi insurgency is coming from Syria and Iran, should we use Iraq as a launching point for a Blitzkrieg style attack in a simultaneous maneuver against Iran and Syria?
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Now that elections have taken place and the constitution has been ratified in Iraq and considering the fact that intel suggest that much of the logistical and financial support to the Iraqi insurgency is coming from Syria and Iran, should we use Iraq as a launching point for a Blitzkrieg style attack in a simultaneous maneuver against Iran and Syria?
I would prefer we attack Syria first, then send the heads of Hamas to the leaders of Iran. A war with Iran is just not possible right now, if there is no other choice, I fear they may have to suffer a nuclear assault. I realize the hypocrisy in that statement, a nuclear assault, because they are trying to go nuclear, but I just don't think that they are responsible enough to have such weapons. I fear their theocracy could lead to the same scenario anyway, so we might as well spare as many lives as possible.
 
Last edited:

OdgenTugbyGlub

Active member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
292
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Definatly not, we wouldn't be able to get ANYTHING done after that. No other countries would cooperate and we would have the iraq insurgency times a billion. I think if we invaded another country in the region with this little provocation (and when you think about it it really is only a little. After all, Russia didnt nuke us when we supported Afghani rebels..) Asian and European countries might actually fight AGAINST us in these countries. WWIII here we come......
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
OdgenTugbyGlub said:
Definatly not, we wouldn't be able to get ANYTHING done after that. No other countries would cooperate and we would have the iraq insurgency times a billion. I think if we invaded another country in the region with this little provocation (and when you think about it it really is only a little. After all, Russia didnt nuke us when we supported Afghani rebels..) Asian and European countries might actually fight AGAINST us in these countries. WWIII here we come......
Who do you think the insurgency is? We're already at war with Iran and Syria, just because they're not in uniform doesn't mean that they're not there already, Syria and Iran have been funding and supporting the insurgency since day one.
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
World war three is already set in motion, and guess what, it's all about religion, once again, surprise, surprise.:shock:
 

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Now that elections have taken place and the constitution has been ratified in Iraq and considering the fact that intel suggest that much of the logistical and financial support to the Iraqi insurgency is coming from Syria and Iran, should we use Iraq as a launching point for a Blitzkrieg style attack in a simultaneous maneuver against Iran and Syria?
So you think the US should attack those countries on the grounds that they are aggressive war makers :shock:
Can you not see that to do so would mean the US itself was behaving like an aggressive war maker.
Why is it that Americans are so dreadfully bad at envisaging situations from the other person/side's point of view ?
How did you feel when Bin Laden launched a pre emptive strike on you on 911?
Your reaction... go bomb a country, namely Iraq, that wasn't responsible for it !
You killed more innocent civilians in the 1st four days of that campaign than Bin laden killed in 911 !
The USA is one of the most dangerous & irresponsible countries in the world.
A disgrace to so called civilisation.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 25, 2005
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
Deegan said:
I would prefer we attack Syria first, then send the heads of Hamas to the leaders of Iran. A war with Iran is just not possible right now, if there is no other choice, I fear they may have to suffer a nuclear assault. I realize the hypocrisy in that statement, a nuclear assault, because they are trying to go nuclear, but I just don't think that they are responsible enough to have such weapons. I fear their theocracy could lead to the same scenario anyway, so we might as well spare as many lives as possible.
I just pray that should any of these countries have nuclear capability they would be more reluctant than you to use it. Usually those most prone to use lethal and destructive force fear others with the same capability. Fact be known, our country has been the only and most negligent with regard to nuclear bombs.
 

OdgenTugbyGlub

Active member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
292
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Who do you think the insurgency is? We're already at war with Iran and Syria, just because they're not in uniform doesn't mean that they're not there already, Syria and Iran have been funding and supporting the insurgency since day one.
I think the insurgency is mostly pissed of iraqi's. As I said, I think invading another country would just start us on the path to WWIII.

World war three is already set in motion, and guess what, it's all about religion, once again, surprise, surprise.
And you're not bothered by this? You don't want to try and stop it? I would hate to die on a battle field because people decieded "aw **** it, it's gonna happen anyway, why not kill some more A-rabs?"
 

OdgenTugbyGlub

Active member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
292
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Who do you think the insurgency is? We're already at war with Iran and Syria, just because they're not in uniform doesn't mean that they're not there already, Syria and Iran have been funding and supporting the insurgency since day one.
I think the insurgency is mostly pissed of iraqi's. As I said, I think invading another country would just start us on the path to WWIII.

World war three is already set in motion, and guess what, it's all about religion, once again, surprise, surprise.
And you're not bothered by this? You don't want to try and stop it? I would hate to die on a battle field because people decieded "aw **** it, it's gonna happen anyway, why not kill some more A-rabs?"

(BTW: Way to make the poll a completly loaded question.)
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Deegan said:
World war three is already set in motion, and guess what, it's all about religion, once again, surprise, surprise.:shock:
Ya and are we really just going to sit back and let Iran go nuclear? I find it analogous to allowing Hitler to rearm Germany after WW1, if we would have stopped him then before he got too powerful, then millions of lives would have been saved.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
OdgenTugbyGlub said:
1. I think the insurgency is mostly pissed of iraqi's. 2. As I said, I think invading another country would just start us on the path to WWIII.



And you're not bothered by this? You don't want to try and stop it? I would hate to die on a battle field because people decieded "aw **** it, it's gonna happen anyway, why not kill some more A-rabs?"

(BTW: Way to make the poll a completly loaded question.)
1. Well you're wrong.

2. We're already fighting WW3 don't you see that?
 

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
2. We're already fighting WW3 don't you see that?
You started it !
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
CollectiveConvergence said:
I just pray that should any of these countries have nuclear capability they would be more reluctant than you to use it. Usually those most prone to use lethal and destructive force fear others with the same capability. Fact be known, our country has been the only and most negligent with regard to nuclear bombs.
You can "pray" all you want, in fact, that is part of the problem! Praying does not change the world my friend, but it does give some religious nut jobs the faithn they need, that after they crash this plane in to a tower, that they will indeed be welcomed in to the after life with open arms, and willing virgins. I pray to the almighty power of the USMC, USAF, U.S Army, U.S Navy, anything else is just fantasy, and empty verbage. I don't want to see our country at war, but the option should always be there.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
robin said:
You started it !
ennn wrong, Radical Islamic extremists started it on 9-11, we're just bringing the fight to them instead of ignoring it like it doesn't exist like we did after the first WTC bombing, the USS Cole bombing and the African Embassy bombings, no we've recognized the enemy and are bringing the war to them so we don't have to fight it here.
 

SKILMATIC

Banned
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
3,407
Reaction score
0
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
IMO anyone who hates freedom and and is a threat to it should be exterminated. I defend life, liberty, and all who threaten it.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Wow, way to make the poll options fair and unbiased.

Let me ask you something: With the HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars we are spending on Iraq (nearing $1,000 per American), with the thousands of lives that have been lost in Iraq, with an insurgency that shows no signs of dying (regardless of democratic progress), what makes you think we're in any position to make new messes when we haven't even cleaned up the one we've already made? The United States simply cannot afford - economically, politically, psychologically - another war or a drastic expansion of the current one.
 

SKILMATIC

Banned
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
3,407
Reaction score
0
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Kandahar said:
Wow, way to make the poll options fair and unbiased.

Let me ask you something: With the HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars we are spending on Iraq (nearing $1,000 per American), with the thousands of lives that have been lost in Iraq, with an insurgency that shows no signs of dying (regardless of democratic progress), what makes you think we're in any position to make new messes when we haven't even cleaned up the one we've already made? The United States simply cannot afford - economically, politically, psychologically - another war.
Excuse me mental disorder, we made no mess. If you call insurgents blowing up car bombs to kill iraqi people and some american soldiers "our mess" then you are highly mistaken. Its not our fault that they laod cars with bombs. The responsibility lays on only one person and thats the insurgents themselves. Its just like when someone shoots someone whose fault is it? Is it the person that got shot becasue they were in the way of the bullet? No, of course not its the people who pull the trigger.

So basically in your mind its the americans fault for being in the way of car bombs? Wow, liberalism has really done a number on you. :doh

Your rebuttal: "Well its the americans fault for being over there and pi$$ing them off. And its our fault because our intelligence was wrong about WMD's. Its also our fault that 9/11 happened cause we provoked them to do it. Oh also the iraqi people dont even want us over there because they are building AFB over there for us(gee go figure). America is just a big bully."

I have heard it all bud.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
SKILMATIC said:
Excuse me mental disorder, we made no mess. If you call insurgents blowing up car bombs to kill iraqi people and some american soldiers "our mess" then you are highly mistaken. Its not our fault that they laod cars with bombs. The responsibility lays on only one person and thats the insurgents themselves. Its just like when someone shoots someone whose fault is it? Is it the person that got shot becasue they were in the way of the bullet? No, of course not its the people who pull the trigger.
That's like saying the primary cause of crime is criminals, or the primary cause of pollution is pollutants, or the primary cause of poverty is not having enough money. It's technically correct, but it doesn't really address the question and doesn't provide any solutions for what we can do about it.

We did make the mess, because Iraq was not a terrorist state prior to the invasion.

SKILMATIC said:
So basically in your mind its the americans fault for being in the way of car bombs? Wow, liberalism has really done a number on you. :doh
Yes. How many American soldiers died in Iraq when there weren't any American soldiers in Iraq?

SKILMATIC said:
Your rebuttal: "Well its the americans fault for being over there and pi$$ing them off. And its our fault because our intelligence was wrong about WMD's. Its also our fault that 9/11 happened cause we provoked them to do it. Oh also the iraqi people dont even want us over there because they are building AFB over there for us(gee go figure). America is just a big bully."

I have heard it all bud.
Regardless, it doesn't matter whose fault it is. The fact is that Iraq is a huge mess and America certainly can't afford to make new ones in other countries (err sorry, we can't afford to allow terrorists to make new messes in other countries we coincidentally happen to be occupying). What makes you think an Iranian or Syrian invasion would turn out any better than the Iraq occupation has?
 
Last edited:

SKILMATIC

Banned
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
3,407
Reaction score
0
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That's like saying the primary cause of crime is criminals
Well isnt it? You mean to tell me the innocent is to blame? Thats what you are saying.

or the primary cause of pollution is pollutants,
Well isnt it? Again liberalism is a mental disorder.

or the primary cause of poverty is not having enough money.
Well usually when someone is poor they usually live in poverty. Its just common sense bud.

It's technically correct,
No no no, it is correct.

but it doesn't really address the question and doesn't provide any solutions for what we can do about it
What is there to question and provide? Heres your answer. When there is a cause there is a reaction. Its simple science. When a terrorist commits attrocities against the American people the reaction to that attrocity is several 2000pd bombs just so happen to drop in their backyard. Hows that for a solution to the problem? You dont like it? Fine, move there and see how long these people will reason with you.

We did make the mess, because Iraq was not a terrorist state prior to the invasion.
Like i said this argument falls under the So typical

Yes. How many American soldiers died in Iraq when there weren't any American soldiers in Iraq?
Again this falls under the "its our fault cause we we got in the way of the car bombs." No responsibility for the people who actually put the bombs in the cars then proceeded to blow the car up when it would hurt as many people as possible. This is what liberalism is all about.

The fact is that Iraq is a huge mess
This is the biggest lie I have ever heard.

America certainly can't afford to make new ones in other countries
We dont have too. If liberlism would just cease to exist in the world and everyone can understand that this enemy doesnt care for anyone no matter what anyone will say is when we can all band together and fight this threat and exterminate its existance. But this will never happen as long as mental cases remain on this earth.

What makes you think an Iranian or Syrian invasion would turn out any better than the Iraq occupation has?
I never said it would turn out any better so I would appreciate it if you didnt put words in my mouth like liberals have problems doing. However, I said it should and needs to be done. Whoever said war and occupation is a walk in the park? You see liberals expect war to be sh!ts and giggles and its quite the opposite. When you mental cases snap out of it and open to reality instead of your utopianistic world then you can understand whats really going on.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
While you guys are at, why don't you create a poll question that states:

"Should we just nuke the whole planet, because at the rate we are going we might as well."
 

SKILMATIC

Banned
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
3,407
Reaction score
0
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
TimmyBoy said:
While you guys are at, why don't you create a poll question that states:

"Should we just nuke the whole planet, because at the rate we are going we might as well."
That wouldnt be such a bad idea:rofl
 

JOHNYJ

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
567
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Do something and make it look natural or accidental,but.No more foreign adventures.
 

robin

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
SKILMATIC said:
Good so now I am finishing it. Hows that? You dont like it? Too bad go home and cry.
Your sort advocate aggression. You are a threat to world peace. You also think it's comical to talk nuke about nuking everyone. You are as shallow & arrogant as Muslim extremists.
If you'd been born in an Arab country you be spouting their nonsense.
 
Last edited:

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Since you are clearly an idiot, I've snipped most of the dumbass references to "liberals" and what you think "the liberals" believe, and only responded to those few statements resembling a coherent argument.

SKILMATIC said:
What is there to question and provide? Heres your answer. When there is a cause there is a reaction. Its simple science. When a terrorist commits attrocities against the American people the reaction to that attrocity is several 2000pd bombs just so happen to drop in their backyard. Hows that for a solution to the problem? You dont like it? Fine, move there and see how long these people will reason with you.
It's a matter of practicality. If you believe that the solution to every anti-American action anywhere in the world is to respond hyper-aggressively, you fail to recognize that the American military and economy are not infinitely powerful. Furthermore, you are no different than those you claim to be opposing.

To use an analogy, if a kid is being bullied in school it might be a good idea for him to hit the bully back so that future bullying will stop. The fallacy, of course, is when the kid applies this to every situation and starts hitting everyone who crosses him. He then becomes a bully himself. This seems to be what you're proposing on an international level.

SKILMATIC said:
Like i said this argument falls under the So typical
Oh no, my argument is "so typical." Wow, your brilliant reasoning convinced me of the error of my ways. Wait, no it didn't.

SKILMATIC said:
Again this falls under the "its our fault cause we we got in the way of the car bombs." No responsibility for the people who actually put the bombs in the cars then proceeded to blow the car up when it would hurt as many people as possible.
Again, it has nothing to do with who is "responsible" for it, it's about the most practical way to solve the problem. Do you deny that Americans are being murdered by car bombs and other forms of terrorism in Iraq today? Do you deny that Americans were NOT being murdered by car bombs and other forms of terrorism in Iraq prior to the invasion? Common sense indicates that if there aren't American soldiers in Iraq, American soldiers won't die in Iraq.

SKILMATIC said:
This is the biggest lie I have ever heard.
The insurgency is just as strong as its ever been. You can tout the virtues of democracy all you want, but the fact is that the instances of terrorism in Iraq (which is supposedly why we're there) are just as high as ever.

SKILMATIC said:
We dont have too. If liberlism would just cease to exist in the world and everyone can understand that this enemy doesnt care for anyone no matter what anyone will say is when we can all band together and fight this threat and exterminate its existance. But this will never happen as long as mental cases remain on this earth.
Demonizing one's enemies is as old as history. The fact is that most of Iraq's insurgents aren't evildoers who worship Osama Bin Laden and want to establish a worldwide caliphate. Most of them are ordinary Iraqis who want us out of their country. Their actions aren't honorable, but they are certainly understandable, at least from the perspective of those of us who aren't ethnocentric xenophobes.

SKILMATIC said:
I never said it would turn out any better so I would appreciate it if you didnt put words in my mouth like liberals have problems doing. However, I said it should and needs to be done. Whoever said war and occupation is a walk in the park? You see liberals expect war to be sh!ts and giggles and its quite the opposite. When you mental cases snap out of it and open to reality instead of your utopianistic world then you can understand whats really going on.
OK, if my model is utopianistic, let's establish a simple cost/benefit analysis of the war in Iraq. You can draw your own conclusions about similar benefits from possible invasions of other countries.

COSTS OF IRAQ WAR:
2,000 American lives
Hundreds of billions of dollars ($1,000 per American that could've been spent on education, medicine, food, or anything else)
Decline in America's worldwide reputation
Less American influence outside of Middle East
Troops stretched dangerously thin
Creation of a terrorist insurgency
Possible loss of an ally in Turkey

BENEFITS OF IRAQ WAR:
Emerging democracy (it remains to be seen if this is any benefit to America)
Possible gain of an ally in Iraq
Overthrow of a random dictator who posed no threat to us

Looking at these costs/benefits, it's clear that the war in Iraq clearly was NOT worth it. Similar cases can be made against invading Syria and Iran, only now we have the added bonus of ALREADY being bogged down in a quagmire.

And if you're going to respond to this, stick with actual logical arguments rather than statements about how much Duh Libruhls Hate Amurka.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom