Syria

[BlackEnvyX]

So, for those who live in the United States. Am I the only one who feels as though our president is running this country into the ground? We should be focusing on fixing the U.S. not get involved in yet another country overseas.

 

[Xonok]

So, for those who live in the United States. Am I the only one who feels as though our president is running this country into the ground? We should be focusing on fixing the U.S. not get involved in yet another country overseas.

It's quite a lot about money.
There's one family in power that sounds somewhat like rat-child, when named.
They have power over a lot of the economy there, mainly heavy industry(especially war industry), banking and media.
For them a war can be incredibly profitable, since they can loan money to all sides and ALSO sell them equipment. All this comes after the fact that if they really do crush syria, then they will have the oil reserves in there under their control too.

 

[Theoden of KoMe]

History has shown that US is kinda bloodthirsty I would say.USMC were founded in 1798 and since then the Us army has kicked ass in most of the worlds battlefeilds.France,Maroco,Lybie,The Golf,Irak,Iran,Vietnam,Pasific,Latin America,Kouveit,Yemen,Korea.

US has been offencive for the last.... er .... 200 years???....!!!!
But with the UN all around it will be way hard to start a WW3.British have been withdraw so did the French and the chinise.Russians claim just that the rebels have used chemicals against the Syrian army.My opinion is that since they have already used them ( which is against the rules of war since the WW1) they deserve to be invaded and supresed.

Im greek,and my ^%*((*&^%^ president who is a &*^%% sais that we will be neutral if a war comes up.Personally I agree,but my heart sais "stfu,just go and kick ass" .Its stupid and ironic cause we got order from these slugheads the germans to close the wearon industry we have in Greece!!!!!!!!!We have only one!!! And they want us to close it...?????!!!!

 

[chobibo]

Seems like* the voters made a bad choice.

 

[Theoden of KoMe]

Yep this was the last vote of their life

 

[Nuclear]

So, for those who live in the United States. Am I the only one who feels as though our president is running this country into the ground? We should be focusing on fixing the U.S. not get involved in yet another country overseas.

In the past, imperialists used to go and occupy poorer countries and take their control, but nowadays they send in their military to "aid" those countries while securing their position in them as their "guardian".

 

[Derdan]

Seems like* the voters made a bad choice.

Forced to make a bad choice, that is.

 

[Linaze]

And here I was told Romney was the supposed warmonger.

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

Problems/Points:

1. What the Free Syrian Army consists of (Rebels)
2. Who used the chemicals
3. Who will support which team
4. What are the retaliation plans of Syria and allies
5. NATO's (US and frances) objective

EDIT:

Mr. Putin of Russia offers to retrieve all Chemical Weapons.
Mr. Assad wants to get rid of all Chemical Weapons in a week to avoid Conflict with NATO
Mr. Obama agrees that Syria should get rid of all Chemical Weapons under Syrian control under supervised vision by the UN, and will give a speech about military action to the American Public

WORLD: International Conflict with Syria may stop if the Syrian Chemical Arsenal is cleared.
RUSSIA & Allies: Still wants to avoid war with NATO
NATO & Allies: Some members of NATO may attack if Chemical Weapons are still in possesion of the Assad Regime

Please tell me if I typed something wrong. Give the opinions, I don't want this thread dead unless this problem is solved/at rest.

 

[Nuclear]

Where do you pull that NATO thing from? From what I've heard, US is pretty much alone on this thing and everyone else opposes it.

 

[Rui]

I was wondering when this thread would show up =P

Its stupid and ironic cause we got order from these slugheads the germans to close the wearon industry we have in Greece!!!!!!!!!We have only one!!! And they want us to close it...?????!!!!

Yes, Germany ordered Portugal to shut down quite a few of its industries too, weaponry included if I'm not wrong. In Greece I reckon it's much more noticeable what Germany is seemingly doing to the countries of Europe.

It's quite a lot about money.

This is what I heard too, that the market of weaponry had quite the influence in the White House.


About the issue of war, yes or not, I may be one of the few that agrees with an intervention, although not the one that's (apparently) being planned. This is my primary argument: if you were one of the people who's got nothing to do with a war, especially one involving chemicals, but are in the middle of it, wouldn't you want something, somebody to help you? What they are doing to people there also includes torture, raping, kidnapping and all other sort of atrocities.
Now what I don't understand is the intervention I keep hearing. They're going to approach the coastline and start firing missiles inside? Is this serious? What about the people? I haven't heard anything about them. Then there's the already mentioned likely involvement of the weapons industry inciting the war, which makes me question the motives.

I know very little about this stuff, so feel free to correct me.

 

[Statharas]

I have a rule in my mind. Fuck the president, and fuck everyone. If someone is going to do something, that is me. I'm going to improve my life, not some fag that lives off sitting on his golden chair atop Mt. Parliament.

 

[BlackEnvyX]

Where do you pull that NATO thing from? From what I've heard, US is pretty much alone on this thing and everyone else opposes it.

France is the only nation that is supporting Obama.

(It's unfair to say it's the US, because only a little over 20% of the population supports Obama in wanting to go to Syria)

 

[Dr Super Good]

Am I the only one who feels as though our president is running this country into the ground? We should be focusing on fixing the U.S. not get involved in yet another country overseas.

I do not live in the USA but I agree with you. His bad influence tried to convince Prime Minister David Cameron to take military action and help terrorists take over the country.

The UK is in no state to go to war when hundreds, if not thousands, of people die every year due to inflated energy costs and crazy tax. Let us not forget that they would be helping people who threatened to kill us the minute the UK parliament said no to action.

Yes it is sad what is happening in Syria but I am pretty sure Assad will eventually solve it and restore a peace to the country. Sure he is not a nice guy, but some peace is better than no peace. All those refugees are not fleeing from Assad, they are fleeing from the conflict that is a result of Rebels fighting Assad. If the Rebels gave up or did not start then they would not have had to flee. In fact, the number of people dying under Assad due to political reasons would be a small fraction of those who have now died due to the conflict.

If the west were to intervene, nothing will be achieved. Even more people will die as the Rebels will kill anyone who supported Assad and Assad has mixed all his "tactical" targets next to civilians. After Assad is gone, the country will fall into a massive never-ending civil war like Libya where women are oppressed and people are massacred every day. The refugees will still be refugees as their country is still as dangerous, if not more so, than it is now.

I say the Russian approach is the best. Get Assad to hand over his chemical weapons and let him sort it out without using them. In the long run it will be better for the country as at least he will get rid of the barbaric rebels and leave the country united.

Both David Cameron and Barack Obama should put a sock in it and stick to their own countries. Especially the USA as they are in no position to argue right and wrong after the war crimes they committed and got away with in Iraq and Afghanistan (including burning civilian villages with Phosphorous and shooting civilians with Helicopter Gunships and bombing BBC news teams).

Instead of wasting money ruining countries, here are some things the UK government could spend it on.
Cheaper University tuition fees. Help everyone get an education for a fraction of the arms budget!
Lower fuel tax. As it is people are not traveling or even keeping themselves warm in winter because energy prices are among the highest in the world.
More prisons. The re-offend rate and average prison sentence is horrible and even superman would hurl in disgust. Give people proper life sentences instead of letting them keep the streets dangerous.
Trains that work. There really is no excuse why you are letting Germany and France subsidize their rail networks with our stupidly over-priced fares and poor service.
Lower alcohol tax. It is disgusting that it costs so much to enjoy a non-dangerous traditional beverage. If this is not an option then spend the money teaching people to drink responsibly and not need A&E due to their stupidity.
Subsidize industry growth. There is no such thing as a "service" economy as you can clearly see by the fact China has no debt yet the UK is almost broke.
Pay back the national debt. Or at least stop making it bigger. The amount of interest that is paid out could solve most of the above.

I am sorry for the rant but the current BS in the news really has gone too far.

 

[Nuclear]

Maybe the urgent need for a war is war profiteering? Gotta fire few missiles and buy some jets to keep the cash flowing.

Surely we could find the cause of this conflict by inspecting which company would benefit the most from the attack.

I don't think I'm exactly a tinfoil hatter when I suggest that corporate interest might play a role in this.

 

[chobibo]

@DSG: The rant was great, I didn't really know why Obama wanted to interfere with Syria's problems.I agree, instead of funding a military conflict, focus on internal problems, since there are many, at least some of it they should solve, else, they should just step down and let someone else run the state.

China sure knows how to use their money.

 

[Xonok]

Paraphrasing someone else from twitter:
"Syrians killed some other syrians, so we should kill even more syrians to prove that killing syrians is wrong"

 

[Rui]

Maybe this thread should be moved to root Off-Topic so it'll get more attention. I was surprised the thread took so long to show up, but now I realize it had been created a few days ago.

 

[Linaze]

As a non-interventionist in the vast majority of cases, I obviously do not believe we should jump to conclusions and attack Syria, whether directly or indirectly.

Until we know for a fact who's deploying chemical weapons down there, we should remain idle, and even if it's proven that Assad is the one to blame for this attack (which I strongly doubt, mind you), I'm still not convinced intervention would be the right choice. I for one wouldn't want Syria to become the next Libya.

 

[Rui]

Well it seems they have confirmed the use of Sarin gas.

 

[Linaze]

Assuming that is entirely true (I'm not saying it is or isn't), that alone's reason enough to help overthrow Assad? To what end, I must ask, to install a west-friendly puppet government and rid Iran of yet another of its allies in the region? I ask this because you cannot honestly believe overthrowing Assad is in the service of the Syrian people.

P.S.
And should you find out a year after Assad's fall that the rebels were in fact behind the gas attacks, will you be able to look the Syrian people into the eyes and apologize for ruining their nation?

 

[Sky Green]

Assuming that is entirely true (I'm not saying it is or isn't), that alone's reason enough to help overthrow Assad? To what end, I must ask, to install a west-friendly puppet government and rid Iran of yet another of its allies in the region? I ask this because you cannot honestly believe overthrowing Assad is in the service of the Syrian people.

P.S.
And should you find out a year after Assad's fall that the rebels were in fact behind the gas attacks, will you be able to look the Syrian people into the eyes and apologize for ruining their nation?

A great argument IMHO. But anyways, let's not exclude a third option. The chemical gas could have been used by a third side in order to start more conflict. Now, I'm not pointing fingers, but there are people who could benefit from a larger conflict in Syria.

 

[Linaze]

And let's not forget the rebels aren't very folksy at all either. A lot of them aren't even native Syrians, but troublemakers from outside come to aid in overthrowing the secular President Assad.

 

[Sky Green]

And let's not forget the rebels aren't very folksy at all either. A lot of them aren't even native Syrians, but troublemakers from outside come to aid in overthrowing the secular President Assad.

Also, Russian strategists argue that Assad's regime wouldn't have done this because it would be not beneficial to them. Because as you might or might not know, using chemicals makes this an international affair, which benefits the rebels more than President Assad. Also, the media often forgets one thing about the chemical weaponry. They know it was used, but not WHO used it. The UN is actually in the process of finding out.

Long story short. Rebels benefit more from the chemical weaponry than President Assad.