War with Syria

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Jait

Jait

Molten Core Raider
5,035
5,317
I will tell you how ignorant having kids makes you. I didn't even realize we were even REMOTELY thinking about war with Syria until this morning.

What the frigging fuck, Obama. Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts, and only the King of Idiots fights three at one time. What happened to the guy and the party that said Bush was a warmonger? That we aren't the worlds policeman? We still have all our original wars, our Cuban Prison, and now lets add another just as were finally starting to slowly creep out of a recession.
 
Jait

Jait

Molten Core Raider
5,035
5,317
Burnesto_sl said:
The last combat troops left Iraq in 2011. I guess the world just passes you by with kids.
Click to expand...
It does.

But don't hit me with "good facts" like we don't have soldiers there in harms way. I'm fairly sure when an American dies there, that their parents take absolutely no solace that they weren't a "combat troop".

Point is. Obama hasn't stopped spending money or lives on these wars. And now he wants a new one. He should go back to being the best salesman that the Gun Industry has ever had in this country. Everytime he opens his mouth any issue, I know the opposite will happen.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
For all the talk about the zero justifications for going to war in Iraq, those justifications were FAR stronger than the ones about going into Syria. Going into Syria just seems such absolute folly from a President who promised to take us out of wars that I really am flabbergasted.

Just fucking sigh. Wtf is wrong with Obama at this point? NSA, gun control, Syria, is he just trying to tank his presidency in every way possible?
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
I'd like to take this time to ask Lumie if Obama is a reptilian plant trying to sabotage everything because it seems like he is literally making the worst decisions ever right now.

I assume his staff meetings involve his advisers telling him "x" would be the worst course of action to take and he chooses to go with it.
 
W

W4RH34D_sl

shitlord
661
3
ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
I'd like to take this time to ask Lumie if Obama is a reptilian plant trying to sabotage everything because it seems like he is literally making the worst decisions ever right now.

I assume his staff meetings involve his advisers telling him "x" would be the worst course of action to take and he chooses to go with it.
Click to expand...
Whatever it takes to keep people watching the circus.
wink.png
 
Dis

Dis

Confirmed Male
748
45
I am not one for conspiracy theories, but in light of Manning/Snowden, and the Bush era WND fiasco, anyone else calling "bullshit" or at least saying "woah woah, let's get some hard evidence, present it to congress, vote on it, before we go in guns blazing".

I mean, the video was absolutely heartbreaking. My gut reaction like everyone else was we have to do something, but after a pause, I feel like we really need to make sure military intervention is the right, proper course of action (last resort, which honestly it is not). Anywho, I am starting to say it myself, "Fucking Obama"
 
Dis

Dis

Confirmed Male
748
45
Elurin_sl said:
Except we haven't done that in...50 years?
Click to expand...
I think we did it before the Iraq Invasion under W. correct? Of course the US Government fabricated a nice web of bad intel and misinformation (nice way of saying out and out lied) to convince congress to vote "yes".
 
Arbitrary

Arbitrary

Tranny Chaser
29,910
83,374
It's not a war! It's a police action! For peacekeeping purposes! And freedom!

You don't need Congress for any of those things.
 
tad10

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,533
599
Dis_sl said:
That is my point, maybe we should go back to doing that. =\
Click to expand...
Yes it would be nice to go to war with at least a little discussion amongst our betters first /sarc

I am going to point out the obvious that we seem to have been gearing up to go into Syria even before the recent video - there were already military advisors in Jordan advising FSA. We were running guns to Syria via Benghazi (that's what the CIA was doing there).

All of which continues to make zero sense to me - I agree with the comments above - it is reminescent of our Iraqi adventure. We really didn't have a good reason to go after Saddam aside from the fact he tried to kill Bush Sr. in Kuwait, and you think we could have just lobbed a missle or two at one of his Palaces when he might have been there (exactly what we did back in the day versus Ghaddafi) as a gesture.

We have no dog in the civil war in Syria.
 
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,657
Eyashusa_sl said:
Even Peter King is saying Obama doesn't need Congress approval for a military strike
Click to expand...
He doesn't. He doesn't even need the pretense of Congressional approval anymore.

This is one of the less-good things about Libya. It expanded the power of the President to engage the American military without any Congressional oversight whatsoever. This is one of those things that if it had gone worse it might have been better for curtailing the unending executive powergrab. It was a stupid risk that panned out well for us. It's sad to say... America won, but Americans?

Well, we're about 500 fewer dead marines than wecouldhave been. So that's a good thing. On the other hand, nobody made too much of a fuss about how completely fucked up the situation was (or hell, even really noticed) because we have 500 less dead marines than we could have had. It is what it is, ya know. Between Osama and Khadafi, Obama has practically neutered one of the constitutional checks of power that even Cheney formed a rubber-stamp Senate to observe.
 
B

Beef Supreme_sl

shitlord
1,207
0
Well, the US certainly won't get a Security Council vote on it because of Russia and China, which means we are going in without a serious UN mandate. This does not play out well because going into Syria is against the wishes of the Russians; they don't want to give up their precious naval base.

Without a solid SC mandate through the UN, the choices available to the US are bad and worse, namely, trying to pin point all of Assad's high priority targets with cruise missiles, or a barrage of airstrikes mixed with covert troops on the ground. Word is, we already have significant boots on the group through the various "rebel" forces.

I'm not totally sold on Assad using chemical weapons on the rebels because everyone, including Russia, knows their use signifies the holy "red line" being crossed. Better, false-flag attacks are the US's bread and butter. Definitely looks like another Gulf of Tonkin, 9/11 and yellow-cake deal here; we need Syria either on our side or our of the arms game (supplying arms from Russia, etc to Hezbollah, etc).

/grabs popcorn
 
tad10

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,533
599
I'm not sold on the chem attack because Assad was (is) winning the war. He doesn't need to resort to a chemical attack. Rebels, OTOH, need the US to intervene.

rrr_img_41687.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.