Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 83

Thread: Can anyone tell me what Obama's policy is in Syria?

  1. #61
    Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,874
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2® View Post
    When can we expect your next good bye rant and new clever name?
    Another not-quite-witty off-topic insult one-liner from FF.

    How new.

    How interesting.

    I don't know, when can I expect the return of your "Hey Fatboy" thing? I know how much you loved that.

    Certainly didn't take long for you to return to your usual form.

  2. #62
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,680
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Churchill View Post
    Certainly didn't take long for you to return to your usual form.
    Nor you my friend.

  3. #63
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,170
    Post Thanks / Like
    Slap fight over now? Plz? Would rather Church respond to me - especially after I dropped the Sudetenland bit in just for him

  4. #64
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    2,074
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Lets take these separately.

    1) Israel's interests in Syria are a stable Syrian government that is not a sponsor of terror/war against it and not seeking its destruction.

    The Assad government, prior to the uprising, fit roughly 2/3 of that equation. It supported and armed Hezbollah, and provided moral support to Palestinian terror groups (large negatives) but was also stable and kept the border quiet (large positives). On balance, Israel could live with the Assad government on its northern border; it posed a danger, but not an existential one, and Israel could address the arming of Hezbollah in a piecemeal fashion (as it had for the last 20 years).

    The Assad government was/is also brutal and repressive. But beyond the fact that it was never going to set the conditions for a comprehensive peace, and generalized disgust at the mistreatment of Syrians under the regime, that really wasn't Israel's worry.

    The insurgents might - might - fit one of those characteristics. If they win, they certainly won't be arming Hezbollah anymore, which is obviously a large benefit. But Iran will find other ways to get arms to Lebanon, and there's no guarantee that the new Syrian government wouldn't instead arm Sunni groups looking to take the mantle of "resistance" from Hezbollah. If the al Nusra folks take charge post-Assad (which is a distinct possibility), that becomes highly likely - along with the end of the quiet border with Syria.

    It is also highly unlikely that any post-Assad government will be stable.

    Bottom line, the Israelis don't really have a clear interest in the outcome of the Syrian revolution. The best case scenario (emergence of a stable, human rights respecting, civil society) and worst case scenario (emergence of a violently Islamist state fresh from a military victory and looking for another military confrontation) both involve insurgent victories - and in the event of an insurgent victory the worst case scenario is the significantly more likely result than the best case scenario. The middle ground is the status quo - not good, but livable - with the Assad regime surviving. (Of course, after brutalizing his citizens, a surviving Assad is likely to attempt to burnish his popularity in the Arab world by more vigorous anti-Israel behavior). Given the range of outcomes, Israel isn't inclined to push either side (regime or insurgents) to victory, and is much more focused on preparing to react to whatever emerges from Syria's ashes.

    As such, Israel has next to no interest in American intervention in Syria.
    Perfectly put. As is evident with Hizbullah joining the fight on Esad's side, currently there are no good guys in Syria best scenario is for them to fight each other like there is no tomorrow. Hence no intervention whatsoever is warranted by anyone except Iran who is the only state that has a clear favorite in the fight.
    Last edited by The Turk; 05-31-2013 at 04:14 AM.

  5. #65
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Jerseystrong
    Posts
    18,172
    Post Thanks / Like
    HOW IN HOLY HELL ARE WE EVEN CONSIDERING THIS...

    http://news.yahoo.com/u-could-decide...122842540.html

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States could make a decision as early as this week on whether to arm Syrian rebels, a U.S. official said on Monday.
    The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the question of whether to arm rebels is on the agenda of White House meetings during the early part of this week.
    The possible move by the United States to arm the rebels who are fighting President Bashar al-Assad's government forces, was first reported by the Associated Press late on Sunday.
    Separately, an Obama administration source said that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has put off his planned trip to the Middle East in order to attend the meetings in Washington.
    The renewed focus comes two years into the uprising against al-Assad that has sparked civil war and seen at least 80,000 people killed.
    Assad, whose Alawite minority is an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam and whose family has ruled Syria for more than four decades, is backed by Iran and Lebanon's Hezbollah.
    There are increasing concerns that Assad may be gaining the upper hand in the conflict as forces loyal to the government recently captured the key town of Qusair.
    The United States and other governments are also weighing evidence that Assad's forces may have used chemical weapons, something U.S. President Barack Obama has said would cross a "red line."
    (Reporting by Washington bureau; editing by Jackie Frank)

  6. #66
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,364
    Post Thanks / Like
    McCain must still have some major drag........

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruby2 View Post
    HOW IN HOLY HELL ARE WE EVEN CONSIDERING THIS...

    http://news.yahoo.com/u-could-decide...122842540.html

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States could make a decision as early as this week on whether to arm Syrian rebels, a U.S. official said on Monday.
    The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the question of whether to arm rebels is on the agenda of White House meetings during the early part of this week.
    The possible move by the United States to arm the rebels who are fighting President Bashar al-Assad's government forces, was first reported by the Associated Press late on Sunday.
    Separately, an Obama administration source said that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has put off his planned trip to the Middle East in order to attend the meetings in Washington.
    The renewed focus comes two years into the uprising against al-Assad that has sparked civil war and seen at least 80,000 people killed.
    Assad, whose Alawite minority is an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam and whose family has ruled Syria for more than four decades, is backed by Iran and Lebanon's Hezbollah.
    There are increasing concerns that Assad may be gaining the upper hand in the conflict as forces loyal to the government recently captured the key town of Qusair.
    The United States and other governments are also weighing evidence that Assad's forces may have used chemical weapons, something U.S. President Barack Obama has said would cross a "red line."
    (Reporting by Washington bureau; editing by Jackie Frank)

  7. #67
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    US Marines deployed along Jordan border with Syria: Report

    Over 1,000 US troops, who had arrived in the Jordanian port of Aqaba via Israel earlier in the week, have headed toward the kingdom's border area with Syria under heavy Jordanian military escort, Israeli sources reported on Friday.

    The troops are reported to be members of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Force.

    Washington and Amman have imposed a news blackout on the deployment of US troops on Jordanian soil.

    US sources have confirmed that the presence of the Marines in Jordan has nothing to do with military drills set to be held between American and Jordanian troops later this month.

    In April, US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Washington is sending 200 troops to Jordan to help contain the violence in Syria, increasing speculation that US is setting the stage for intervention in the Arab country.

    At the time, Russia criticized the deployment of US troops to Jordan over the Syrian crisis, describing the move as an unconstructive step that threatens to expand the conflict.

    Jordan’s opposition party, the Islamic Action Front, also denounced the presence of American troops in the kingdom and asked the government to review its decision to authorize the deployment of foreign troops on Jordan’s soil.
    http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/06...-syria-border/

  8. #68
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,170
    Post Thanks / Like
    If we're posting laughable presstv articles, I'm fond of this one:

    The Israeli “security publication,” DEBKA, a key part of their “war through deception” campaign against the world, has now made it inexorably clear, Israel is putting into motion their “final solution,” a campaign to pit nation against nation.

    The result, the planet a smoldering ruin, Israel ruling over the ashes and mass graves
    , is a foregone conclusion, at least to Netanyahu and his worldwide terrorist network. . . .


    . . . the Zionists, the Neocons, and the Dominionists, a vast worldwide network of financial criminals, corrupt politicians and power-mad tyrants. In America, those now seeking to stage a military coup in the United States, submit to full Israeli control and lead the world into a new “dark age.”

    Conspiracy theory? Of course, very much so, but not just a theory but plans long whispered now made clear, plans impossible to misconstrue.

    . . .

    The American president is a likely assassination target. A new 9/11 style terror attack is a necessity, the groundwork already laid at Sandyhook and the Boston Marathon.

    The preparations are already underway, with political and military division in the US being contrived, “sequestration,” threats of gun seizure and a planned economic crash, another “pump and dump.” . . .
    http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/0...ing-world-war/

  9. #69
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,889
    Post Thanks / Like
    Those Marines there are not laughing

  10. #70
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    18,675
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think Obama is evolving with regards to Syria.

  11. #71
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,889
    Post Thanks / Like
    The 26th MEU is participating in Exercise Eager Lion.

  12. #72
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    893
    Post Thanks / Like
    Time to start minding our own damn business. This is a no win for the United States of America, there is no good side for us in this conflict. Both side rebel and government hates our guts, and the rebels will turn on us the moment they defeat the government forces.
    Actually if you ask me, having the government forces come out on top is the best case of a bad situation. First the WMD's stay under a more accountable control. Second,a semi form of stable government will remain in control. A government which certainly will be and has been more tolerable towards women rights, religious rights. You could take it to the bank that if the rebels win those small freedoms will be a thing of the pass.
    Sometime it better to stick with the devil you know.

  13. #73
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,889
    Post Thanks / Like

  14. #74
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,283
    Post Thanks / Like
    B. Hussein's policy is to complain with stern letters of rebuke but actually do nothing about Syria or their WMDs, which didn't previously exist but since they are used to kill people and because dead poisoned bodies line their streets now are said to exist, that their Baathist party brethren in Iraq were said to have had, and were a reason for Bill Clinton and American (D) insisting on and passing resolutions re: Iraq regime change because Iraq had WMD, but then could not be found, and were said to have never ever existed in Iraq, but somehow now exist in Syria who never manufactured any, yet it was inconceivable and impossible that they were moved from Iraq to Syria.

  15. #75
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,364
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    B. Hussein's policy is to complain with stern letters of rebuke but actually do nothing about Syria or their WMDs, which didn't previously exist but since they are used to kill people and because dead poisoned bodies line their streets now are said to exist, that their Baathist party brethren in Iraq were said to have had, and were a reason for Bill Clinton and American (D) insisting on and passing resolutions re: Iraq regime change because Iraq had WMD, but then could not be found, and were said to have never ever existed in Iraq, but somehow now exist in Syria who never manufactured any, yet it was inconceivable and impossible that they were moved from Iraq to Syria.
    Wow, you can't help yourself.

  16. #76
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    The Big Apple, USA
    Posts
    22,030
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    B. Hussein's policy is to complain with stern letters of rebuke but actually do nothing about Syria or their WMDs, which didn't previously exist but since they are used to kill people and because dead poisoned bodies line their streets now are said to exist, that their Baathist party brethren in Iraq were said to have had, and were a reason for Bill Clinton and American (D) insisting on and passing resolutions re: Iraq regime change because Iraq had WMD, but then could not be found, and were said to have never ever existed in Iraq, but somehow now exist in Syria who never manufactured any, yet it was inconceivable and impossible that they were moved from Iraq to Syria.
    Seig

  17. #77
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    B. Hussein's policy is to complain with stern letters of rebuke but actually do nothing about Syria or their WMDs, which didn't previously exist but since they are used to kill people and because dead poisoned bodies line their streets now are said to exist, that their Baathist party brethren in Iraq were said to have had, and were a reason for Bill Clinton and American (D) insisting on and passing resolutions re: Iraq regime change because Iraq had WMD, but then could not be found, and were said to have never ever existed in Iraq, but somehow now exist in Syria who never manufactured any, yet it was inconceivable and impossible that they were moved from Iraq to Syria.
    Agreed and what do you think we should do about it? Arm the rebels, insert our own troops into another civil conflict? Apparently 10 years of war didn't get rid of WMD's in Iraq, since they just moved them and Iraq is still smoldering toward Civil War as is Libya and Syria.

    What should be our policy? tipping these wars toward one side or the other? Occupation? Supporting one side against the other in an arms race with the Russians?
    Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 06-11-2013 at 08:47 AM.

  18. #78
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    893
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=

    What should be our policy? tipping these wars toward one side or the other? Occupation? Supporting one side against the other in an arms race with the Russians?[/QUOTE]

    Do what nations have done for centuries regarding these areas of the world, long before the birth of our own nation. Mind there own business, keep there noses out, allow them to do what they do best, continue to kill each other in the name of God.

  19. #79
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,283
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    Wow, you can't help yourself.
    Get back to your post holding the umbrella over the President's head, it's urgent.
    You're about as "independent" a voice as Pravda is a beacon of free speech.
    Last edited by Jungle Shift Jet; 06-11-2013 at 06:18 PM.

  20. #80
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,283
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs View Post
    Agreed and what do you think we should do about it? Arm the rebels, insert our own troops into another civil conflict? Apparently 10 years of war didn't get rid of WMD's in Iraq, since they just moved them and Iraq is still smoldering toward Civil War as is Libya and Syria.

    What should be our policy? tipping these wars toward one side or the other? Occupation? Supporting one side against the other in an arms race with the Russians?
    Our, i.e. the USA's policy should be to eradicate nuclear/WMD capability in the ummah by any means necessary from cyberattacks to MOAB/daisy cutters or more.

    The SCOAMF we have in charge has been doing plenty of unsanctioned, unapproved by Congress, unnecessary tipping the last few years of the ME and N. Africa towards his ideological brethren in the Muslim Brotherhood / Al Qaeda. We flipped Qaddafi on nukes as a side benefit to removing S. Hussein, Clintons crew of spooks who couldnt find their ass with both hands were unaware now we are unaware again as to where all his "stuff" is.

    IMO, the purple-lipped rat-eared dog-eater could care less if a dirty bomb or worse goes off in the USA, especially in a red state, as long as he can avoid any responsibility. The Snowden defection will bring more oversight by pseudo-conservatives, and B. Hussein will be happy to skirt blame by saying, "See? The GOP/the right tied intelligence's hands"
    Last edited by Jungle Shift Jet; 06-11-2013 at 06:14 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us