The Official Syria (and all things about it) Thread

[Orcoa]

My family has a long history with the military so I understand a thing or two about War and how it can be used for both legitimate problems or be used to further the greed of groups of people that have a say in the military.

Exactly. Some wars can be justified, some can not be justified.

Besides when people say this will be a war is greatly mistaken on what counts as a "war".

These are selected military strikes agasint selected targets, not agasint the entire nation of Syria.

All we are doing if we go over there is enforcing the laws agasint chemical weapons that the UN has written and is not enforcing agasint the Syria government.

[The Republic of Lanos]

So does the boss want to strike or not?

I sure hope he will. Can't have motherfuckers gassing people.

Should have done something earlier before it got to this shitfest honestly.

[Frisivisia]

Good, good, good.

No, not good.

Although I do support some consequences for the Syrian Government, and war should be last resort.

"Oh no, the US has imposed trade sanctions, Bashar!"

"Oh shit, better stop gassing people!"

[The Scientific States]

Exactly. Some wars can be justified, some can not be justified.

Besides when people say this will be a war is greatly mistaken on what counts as a "war".

These are selected military strikes agasint selected targets, not agasint the entire nation of Syria.

All we are doing if we go over there is enforcing the laws agasint chemical weapons that the UN has written and is not enforcing agasint the Syria government.

Good point. But military force will lead to war. Assad said he will not tolerate a Western attack.

[Shofercia]

Then present evidence as to who used them, evidence that's beyond a reasonable doubt. Apparently when America bombs it's not "innocent before guitly," it's "guilty cause we say so!" The problem with that precedent, is that the top dogs can change. And you really want to hand that precedent to China, Joe?

Do you seriously doubt international intelligence? Do you seriously think that John fucking Kerry and President Obama are hawks?

Fucking bullshit.

What international intelligence? All I'm hearing is "we said so" and "we assess", from US and France. Have you a source? Additionally, I'm looking at what comes out of Obama's mouth, and what comes out of Kerry's mouth. Those are comments that are more hawkish than what most Americans support.

[Frisivisia]

Besides when people say this will be a war is greatly mistaken on what counts as a "war".

These are selected military strikes agasint selected targets, not agasint the entire nation of Syria.

All we are doing if we go over there is enforcing the laws agasint chemical weapons that the UN has written and is not enforcing agasint the Syria government.

Good point. But military force will lead to war. Assad said he will not tolerate a Western attack.

Yeah, I for one think that we should listen to what Johnny Gas-'em-up will fucking tolerate.

[Orcoa]

I sure hope he will. Can't have motherfuckers gassing people.

Should have done something earlier before it got to this shitfest honestly.

No one in the Syria Government broke any UN laws agasint Chemical weapons during that time.

Now that they did (Or at lest seemed they did) we are going over there to enforce that policy that the UN seems to not have the guts to enforce (nothing new really if you think about it.)

[Blasveck]

I sure hope he will. Can't have motherfuckers gassing people.

Should have done something earlier before it got to this shitfest honestly.

This ^

But I'm wary of the reaction from Russia and China, if they decide to retaliate to "help" Assad.

[Srboslavija]

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/securit ... tails.html

Two bishops were kidnapped by the rebels.

So now ALL the rebels hate Christians?

Fucking hell.

Are you at all familiar with the plight of the various Christian communities in the Mid-East?

[Democratic Koyro]

Do you seriously doubt international intelligence? Do you seriously think that John fucking Kerry and President Obama are hawks?

Fucking bullshit.

What international intelligence? All I'm hearing is "we said so" and "we assess", from US and France. Have you a source? Additionally, I'm looking at what comes out of Obama's mouth, and what comes out of Kerry's mouth. Those are comments that are more hawkish than what most Americans support.

Tweets from rebels = "intelligence". The CIA has really let itself fucking go. Bring back the insanity-causing beard itching powder and exploding cigars please, not a bunch of highschool drop-outs trolling rebel twitter feeds.

[Frisivisia]

Do you seriously doubt international intelligence? Do you seriously think that John fucking Kerry and President Obama are hawks?

Fucking bullshit.

What international intelligence? All I'm hearing is "we said so" and "we assess", from US and France. Have you a source? Additionally, I'm looking at what comes out of Obama's mouth, and what comes out of Kerry's mouth. Those are comments that are more hawkish than what most Americans support.

Most Americans don't have the experience or knowledge that Kerry and Obama have. There's a reason that we don't vote on troop movements and logistics, and that's because the people don't have the training or the intelligence to make the best decision for US and world interests.

[The Scientific States]

No, not good.

Although I do support some consequences for the Syrian Government, and war should be last resort.

"Oh no, the US has imposed trade sanctions, Bashar!"

"Oh shit, better stop gassing people!"

When you put it that way it sounds insignificant, although I think there should be slightly bigger consequences then that, and Id rather have a international organization carry out those consequences.

[Frisivisia]

Should have done something earlier before it got to this shitfest honestly.

This ^

But I'm wary of the reaction from Russia and China, if they decide to retaliate to "help" Assad.

Do you honestly think that Russia and China are on his side and will retaliate if he's attacked?

[Democratic Koyro]

"Oh no, the US has imposed trade sanctions, Bashar!"

"Oh shit, better stop gassing people!"

When you put it that way it sounds insignificant, although I think there should be slightly bigger consequences then that, and Id rather have a international organization carry out those consequences.

The Syrian Government didn't trade with US dollars, so i doubt it conducted that much trade (if any) with the US + Western Europe pre-terrorist uprising anyway.

[Warda]

Should have done something earlier before it got to this shitfest honestly.

This ^

But I'm wary of the reaction from Russia and China, if they decide to retaliate to "help" Assad.

Neither has said they will directly help, only give arm shipments. Now that I think about random lol bombing of a few sites and making Russia and China support Assad and probably end the war because of the new supplies actually sounds like a good plan.

[Frisivisia]

"Oh no, the US has imposed trade sanctions, Bashar!"

"Oh shit, better stop gassing people!"

When you put it that way it sounds insignificant, although I think there should be slightly bigger consequences then that, and Id rather have a international organization carry out those consequences.

The UN won't do it. We have to.

[The Scientific States]

Should have done something earlier before it got to this shitfest honestly.

This ^

But I'm wary of the reaction from Russia and China, if they decide to retaliate to "help" Assad.

I think China will be smart enough not to get involved in this. Sure they'll be a little pissed at us, but we could stop relying on China anyways.

Russia on the other hand, will be more than a little pissed.

[Shofercia]

What international intelligence? All I'm hearing is "we said so" and "we assess", from US and France. Have you a source? Additionally, I'm looking at what comes out of Obama's mouth, and what comes out of Kerry's mouth. Those are comments that are more hawkish than what most Americans support.

Tweets from rebels = "intelligence". The CIA has really let itself fucking go. Bring back the insanity-causing beard itching powder and exploding cigars please, not a bunch of highschool drop-outs trolling rebel twitter feeds.

"But clearly, it could never be rebels. Because they don't possess those kinds of weapons."
"How do you know?"
"Well, we said so!"

If the same style of argumentation was used to oppose Gay Marriage, NSG would be ripping these arguments to shreds, because they're circular in nature, along the lines of "we said so, ergo it's right!"

[Orcoa]

Besides when people say this will be a war is greatly mistaken on what counts as a "war".

These are selected military strikes agasint selected targets, not agasint the entire nation of Syria.

All we are doing if we go over there is enforcing the laws agasint chemical weapons that the UN has written and is not enforcing agasint the Syria government.

Good point. But military force will lead to war. Assad said he will not tolerate a Western attack.

And I should care what Assad says?

He needs to understand that he is on the shit list for using Chem weapons on his own people and he has to either do two things.

Be the honorable one and leave the country, dismantle his government, and allow democracy into the country (even if it may turn out bad)

Or suffer having to face only a small part of the US military, one that could destroy and hurt his country.

If I were him, I would choose number one.

[Blasveck]

This ^

But I'm wary of the reaction from Russia and China, if they decide to retaliate to "help" Assad.

Do you honestly think that Russia and China are on his side and will retaliate if he's attacked?

I never said they absolutely would.

Who knows? I don't know what Putin is thinking.

[Democratic Koyro]

This ^

But I'm wary of the reaction from Russia and China, if they decide to retaliate to "help" Assad.

Do you honestly think that Russia and China are on his side and will retaliate if he's attacked?

It's unreasonable to expect a country not to retaliate when its attacked. Fly military aircraft over any nation you don't have a military access treaty with and they'll be intercepted or fired upon. Though there's not much The government can do if they go with a pure-naval attack unless they want their osa missile boats "lol raped" before they even get in range.

[The Scientific States]

When you put it that way it sounds insignificant, although I think there should be slightly bigger consequences then that, and Id rather have a international organization carry out those consequences.

The UN won't do it. We have to.

The UN made anti chemical weapon legislation themselves, they'll probably do something.

America isn't and shouldn't be the world police. If something goes wrong we can't be the only ones to do something.

[Shofercia]

What international intelligence? All I'm hearing is "we said so" and "we assess", from US and France. Have you a source? Additionally, I'm looking at what comes out of Obama's mouth, and what comes out of Kerry's mouth. Those are comments that are more hawkish than what most Americans support.

Most Americans don't have the experience or knowledge that Kerry and Obama have. There's a reason that we don't vote on troop movements and logistics, and that's because the people don't have the training or the intelligence to make the best decision for US and world interests.

Still waiting for evidence that's beyond a reasonable doubt. "Assad did it, cause we said so, trust us" is still not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Blasveck]

So now ALL the rebels hate Christians?

Fucking hell.

Are you at all familiar with the plight of the various Christian communities in the Mid-East?

I am.
They should probably fucking move to someplace safer.

[Frisivisia]

Tweets from rebels = "intelligence". The CIA has really let itself fucking go. Bring back the insanity-causing beard itching powder and exploding cigars please, not a bunch of highschool drop-outs trolling rebel twitter feeds.

"But clearly, it could never be rebels. Because they don't possess those kinds of weapons."
"How do you know?"
"Well, we said so!"

If the same style of argumentation was used to oppose Gay Marriage, NSG would be ripping these arguments to shreds, because they're circular in nature, along the lines of "we said so, ergo it's right!"

When you are a primary source, "because I said so" is a completely valid argument.