U.S. Weighs Direct Military Action Against ISIS in Syria (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 06:07:20 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  U.S. Weighs Direct Military Action Against ISIS in Syria (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: U.S. Weighs Direct Military Action Against ISIS in Syria  (Read 4822 times)
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,736


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« on: August 23, 2014, 10:06:02 PM »

Can we bomb some of Assad's military bases by "mistake"?

No. That would be counter-productive. You won't hear anyone in the Administration admit this but for all intents and purposes we are allies with the Assad regime against the Islamic State.

He may be a bastard, but he's the only real hope for a secular Syria. He's our bastard.

And anyways, as crappy as Assad is, helping him would be been the most effective way to destroy ISIS.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,736


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2014, 12:11:18 AM »

Assad is the more long-term evil, he could actually survive all this, while the IS is doomed to be destroyed. And Assad has killed much more people.

Yes, I'd rather take out Assad, and have the IS make some gains in Syria before they're taken out.

Is Bashar al-Assad a threat to the US? No. Is Bashar al-Assad a threat to Syria? Of course.

But it's not our job to look out for the best interests of the Syrian people. We're not a human rights brigade.

Indy, Starwatcher, you are neglecting or underestimating the consequences of an ISIS takeover on the Syrian people. The Shias, Christian and moderate Sunni communities would suffer just as they have in Iraq.  ISIS would cleanse them of their supposed sins. They could make Assad's barrel bombs seem tame.

This is why I'm saying we need to leave Assad in power there and enable him to get IS out of Syria.

Starwatcher wants to remove Assad and fails to understand that all we'd be doing is creating yet another Iraq.

That's Hillary Clinton's views. With 20/20 hindsight, Hillary still thinks we should have armed the rebels, so I guess she decided her Iraq vote didn't screw things up enough there.  Maybe she can find some other area of the world to be completely wrong about instead?
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,736


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2014, 01:46:40 AM »
« Edited: August 24, 2014, 01:49:16 AM by ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ »

Assad is the more long-term evil, he could actually survive all this, while the IS is doomed to be destroyed. And Assad has killed much more people.

Yes, I'd rather take out Assad, and have the IS make some gains in Syria before they're taken out.

Is Bashar al-Assad a threat to the US? No. Is Bashar al-Assad a threat to Syria? Of course.

But it's not our job to look out for the best interests of the Syrian people. We're not a human rights brigade.

Indy, Starwatcher, you are neglecting or underestimating the consequences of an ISIS takeover on the Syrian people. The Shias, Christian and moderate Sunni communities would suffer just as they have in Iraq.  ISIS would cleanse them of their supposed sins. They could make Assad's barrel bombs seem tame.

This is why I'm saying we need to leave Assad in power there and enable him to get IS out of Syria.

Starwatcher wants to remove Assad and fails to understand that all we'd be doing is creating yet another Iraq.

That's Hillary Clinton's views. With 20/20 hindsight, Hillary still thinks we should have armed the rebels, so I guess she decided her Iraq vote didn't screw things up enough there.  Maybe she can find some other area of the world to be completely wrong about instead?
To be fair, if we are willing to take the hero's road and put boots on the ground, then we won't need Assad. I think that's her plan.

Anyone who wants to fight ISIS and Assad at the same time is an idiot. If that's her plan, then it shows that she decided the only thing wrong with the Iraq war that she voted for was that it wasn't enough of a disaster. As for me, I don't vote for idiotic warmongers for President regardless of what party they claim to be in.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,736


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2014, 03:44:05 AM »

No guys, Hillary wanted to support the real good guys on the ground, the moderate rebels. And yes, there were moderate rebels. Now we're left with supporting a guy who gasses kids. I hope you're proud of that, jfern.

So we'd arm the "moderates" that McCain met who became ISIS members? Yeah, that would work real well for stopping ISIS.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,736


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2014, 04:35:09 AM »

Hillary in 2002:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://themoderatevoice.com/197833/clintons-hawkish-statements-on-syria-remind-left-that-clinton-does-not-share-our-views-on-foreign-policy/

Lets not nominate a female Joe Lieberman as President.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,736


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #5 on: August 26, 2014, 03:48:12 AM »
« Edited: August 26, 2014, 03:50:14 AM by ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/world/middleeast/obama-syria-ISIS.html


Maybe we'll mainly go after ISIS forces who are fighting the Kurds.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 12 queries.