Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 83

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

  1. #21
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,779
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    And what is Iran building?


    Iran does not yet have ICBM's let alone nukes. This will probably change.

    The answer to your original statement really depends on the definition of Islamists. I think of Islamists as Al-Qaeda Not Iran.


    Iran and Al-Qaeda are enemies. I believe when Iran becomes a nuclear power they can be held in via MAD just as the Soviet Union was. However if Al-Qaeda becomes a nuclear power it could well be "game over".

  2. #22
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,779
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruby2 View Post
    I guess Syrias superior air defense system doesn't detect Israeli missiles.
    Israel is not trying to impose a no fly zone on Syria.

    Nobody’s air defense can stop missiles. The US is spending billions trying to create such a shield.

  3. #23
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,777
    Post Thanks / Like
    GENEVA - UN human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria's civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

    The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said commission member Carla Del Ponte.

  4. #24
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,954
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    GENEVA - UN human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria's civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

    The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said commission member Carla Del Ponte.
    Your article indicates they've only 'heard' that the rebels did it...

    How did the rebels get sarin? It's not like they just whipped up a batch...

  5. #25
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Jerseystrong
    Posts
    18,552
    Post Thanks / Like
    I find it hypocritical that Syria has categorized the Israeli attack as a flagrant violation of international law. I guess murdering your own citizens is cool but when another country attacks in order to destroy weapons being transported solely for the purpose of trying to anhilihate that country it's time to cry to the media. I see the Syria s have been taking notes from Hamas. it is hysterical that Syria is saying that Israel is aligning themselves with the rebel cause. Um no. Israel knows the rebels would like to see Israeli destruction just as much as the current puppet regime, they simply want to prevent weapons from getting to Hezbollah. The thought that Israel could be rooting for anyone here or trying to force some sort of outcome is hysterical yet totally predictable coming from these Muslim countries.
    Last edited by Ruby2; 05-05-2013 at 11:29 PM.

  6. #26
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,777
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite View Post
    Your article indicates they've only 'heard' that the rebels did it...

    How did the rebels get sarin? It's not like they just whipped up a batch...
    The point of the article is no one is sure what is happening over there.

    And if hearing means talking to the victims, doctors who treated the victims and witnesses you'd be right.

  7. #27
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,875
    Post Thanks / Like
    The chemical weapons could have been stolen from Syrian Stockpiles or received from an outside group. Who really knows who is involved. The US should not choose sides, we know what will happen. Iraq, Egypt, Libya.

  8. #28
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    GENEVA - UN human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria's civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

    The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said commission member Carla Del Ponte.
    dude, are you ever on the right side of any issue...ever? I'd argue NO

  9. #29
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,777
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker134 View Post
    dude, are you ever on the right side of any issue...ever? I'd argue NO
    You haven't been right yet, so I'm not worried about what you think.

  10. #30
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Buster View Post
    Israel is not trying to impose a no fly zone on Syria.

    Nobody’s air defense can stop missiles. The US is spending billions trying to create such a shield.



    Of course you can defend against missiles. The U.S. has had such a system for years. Additional missile batteries have recently been deployed from the continental U.S. to more remote outlying areas.

  11. #31
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,277
    Post Thanks / Like
    Obuttocks determined that the Muslim Brotherhood (and their ideological compatriots) are the way to go in the Mideast. The time for arming Syrian rebels was at least 2-4 months ago. Now, Islamic fascists have become the major force of the rebellion, and if they win, Syria becomes a Sunni theocracy (Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qeada, et al).

    So, mission accomplished for our brainless, ballless Organizer-in-Chief.

  12. #32
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,777
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by quantum View Post
    Obuttocks determined that the Muslim Brotherhood (and their ideological compatriots) are the way to go in the Mideast. The time for arming Syrian rebels was at least 2-4 months ago. Now, Islamic fascists have become the major force of the rebellion, and if they win, Syria becomes a Sunni theocracy (Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qeada, et al).

    So, mission accomplished for our brainless, ballless Organizer-in-Chief.
    Egypt voted for their current leader.

    You and Tuck need to take a break from Drudge.

  13. #33
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Post Thanks / Like
    He made a mistake drawing a line in the sand that has boxed him in. No need to compound that mistake by putting US arms in the hands of people who may well turn them on us at some point.

  14. #34
    Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,874
    Post Thanks / Like
    There is no reason for U.S. involvement in Syria.

    We should not sell anyone weapons.

    We should not in any way provide troops/airstrikes.

    No U.S. intervention.

    If this Civil War requires intervention, it should be done only by universal agreemnet within the U.N., and then only by forces provided equally and fairly from all U.N. member states.

  15. #35
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,750
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker134 View Post
    No fly zone? Obama said he'd stop Assad from killing his own people if it was proven that he was using chemical weapons.
    Yeah b/c that worked really well from stopping Saddam Hussein from torturing and killing his own people for 12 years. Hey maybe Obama can invade Syria - it would be just like the Iraq war except the Syrians would actually have WMD's and be actively participating in terrorism and we don't have to lie about it. Fabulous.
    Last edited by detjetsfan; 05-06-2013 at 10:47 PM.

  16. #36
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,779
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Of course you can defend against missiles. The U.S. has had such a system for years. Additional missile batteries have recently been deployed from the continental U.S. to more remote outlying areas.
    You are wrong.
    Missiles move way fast than a jet and are thus harder to hit. They are faster because there is no intention of landing them intact AND a human does not need to be aboard and remain comfortable.

    We have the patriot missile system. The Patriot system was originally designed to hit planes and pressed into the anti-missile role. Remember Scud missiles got by that system to hit Israel and Saudi Arabia in Gulf War I.

  17. #37
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    From Parts Unknown
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker134 View Post
    It's been a week since US intelligence presented clear evidence that Assad's regime has used chemical weapons against his own people. He has slaughtered 70,000 mostly defenseless people, specifically targeting women and children. Tough guy Obama drew a red line regarding chemical weapons, then gives a BS lawyer-response when presented with the evidence in his disastrous press conference earlier this week.

    I realize the American people have middle-east fatigue, but what's happening in Syria constitutes genocide.

    I'm sure Iran, North Korea, China and Russia are enjoying our wimp President at his sissy best.
    What, you want an invasion? I am a pretty far right guy, but that is insane.

  18. #38
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,264
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Buster View Post
    Remember Scud missiles got by that system to hit Israel and Saudi Arabia in Gulf War I.
    That was over twenty years ago... Today's anti missile technology is far more advanced than during the Gulf War.

    You can thank Ronald Reagan for protecting your ass......

  19. #39
    Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,874
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Buster View Post
    You are wrong.
    Missiles move way fast than a jet and are thus harder to hit. They are faster because there is no intention of landing them intact AND a human does not need to be aboard and remain comfortable.

    We have the patriot missile system. The Patriot system was originally designed to hit planes and pressed into the anti-missile role. Remember Scud missiles got by that system to hit Israel and Saudi Arabia in Gulf War I.
    If you recall, the U.S. utilized their shipbourne Aegis missile (RIM-161 and variants) system to destroy a satellite in low-earth orbit. As you may or may not know, those move at considerable speeds in excess of many conventional missile systems, and at ranges vastly in excess of most anti-missile work. Aegis has also fared very well in almost all of it's testing as an Anti-Ballistic missile platform. Patriot (MIM-104 and variants) is certainly one option amongst a suite of Anti-missile systems we currently posess and/or are in development.

    Like all things millitary, it would depend on the specificic circumstances as to how these systems would perform.

  20. #40
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Buster View Post
    You are wrong.
    Missiles move way fast than a jet and are thus harder to hit. They are faster because there is no intention of landing them intact AND a human does not need to be aboard and remain comfortable.

    We have the patriot missile system. The Patriot system was originally designed to hit planes and pressed into the anti-missile role. Remember Scud missiles got by that system to hit Israel and Saudi Arabia in Gulf War I.

    You once again demonstrate that you are TOTALLY uninformed.

    The U.S. currently has a couple of anti missile systems in use and deployed which have been tested and are FULLY operational. The can defeat both ICBMs and shorter range missile attacks. These systems have been available for years. These are in addition to the Patriot missile weapon.

    Perhaps you should make friends with some high ranking military people who could explain this to you. We are a little more sophisticated than you think.

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