[peck420]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Any takers on how soon it'll take the 'rebels' to turn their new weapons on them 'damn Yankees'?? Funny that the Americans are arming the enemies of a government that protects Christians and women from Islamic fundies(see enemy).

Isn't the first time and wont be the last time. Money and power talk, bullshit and ideals walk.

[BartSimpson]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Any takers on how soon it'll take the 'rebels' to turn their new weapons on them 'damn Yankees'?? Funny that the Americans are arming the enemies of a government that protects Christians and women from Islamic fundies(see enemy).

Why is this any surprise? Our President made it abundantly clear that he'll always take the side of the muslims against the USA and here he is doing it.

At least that's one campaign promise he's kept.

[xerxes]

I'm pretty sure his campaign slogan wasn't "fuck America, praise to Allah."

But this is still a brutally stupid thing to do. Why are chemical weapons some magical line? 93,000 dead isn't? The only reason I can think of to start arming the rebels is to keep Hezbollah and Iran busy and distracted, but not even that justifies this kind of stupid.

[Zipperfish]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Could there be a bit of the 'Wag the Dog' thing going on here?

The Obama gang has been getting hit by a crapload of inconvenient scandals lately. Can't you kind of see them sitting around Chicago style plotting strategy on some way of distracting from the scandals. Looking for a diversion?

Something like...

"OK whata we got?"

"Well, we hinted we'd jump in on Syria if evidence turned up that chemical weapons were being used?"

"Anything there we can use. Can we sell that one?"

"Sure, somebody was doing something with some kind of chemical a while back, I think. We'll give a few of our favorites at Politico, WaPo and the NY Times a pat on the head and a 'attaboy'. They'll sell it."

Maybe. Or maybe all those "Zionist" conspiracists are right. I can't see what the hell theya re hoping to achieve there. They should be focused on China.

[stratos]

Aren't Hezbollah and Iran already arming the rebels?

[xerxes]

No. They're arming and fighting for Assads regime.

[BartSimpson]

xerxes xerxes:

I'm pretty sure his campaign slogan wasn't "fuck America, praise to Allah."

Perhaps it should have been.

xerxes xerxes:

But this is still a brutally stupid thing to do. Why are chemical weapons some magical line? 93,000 dead isn't? The only reason I can think of to start arming the rebels is to keep Hezbollah and Iran busy and distracted, but not even that justifies this kind of stupid.

Obama has some seven major scandals going on right now that threaten his regime and this is just a convenient 'wag the dog' opportunity to distract people from the growing bipartisan consensus that this President doesn't give a damn about our Constitution and our liberties.

[stratos]

I don't see why we, we being the world, don't just say okay if you all want to fight then fight. Don't let it spill outside of your boarders or we, the world, will come in and kick the shit out of both sides and let the UN run your nation for 50yrs. I know it's cold harted in one way but why do we, America, and the rest of the world feel that America has to get involved with every freaking war that springs up in the Muslim parts of the world.

To me its a major hyporcrisy of America across all political lines. We love to stick our nose into other people problems but by God don't you, the world, even think of ever sticking your nose into our business.

I can see no political, social, or economical reason to become involved with the Syrian civil war / rebellon. As long as it stays inside the boarders of Syria its Syria's problem.

[N_Fiddledog]

xerxes xerxes:

I'm pretty sure his campaign slogan wasn't "fuck America, praise to Allah."

No, but he did make sure he flew over to bow to Saudi King Abdulah. It's interesting it's to the Saudi's and their wacky Wahhabi religious arm's advantage if Assad goes down. The Iranians favor Assad. The Saudi's fear the Iranians.

[xerxes]

In a way, it's rapidly becoming a proxy war. Hezbollah joined the party at iran's behest. Refugees are straining Jordan and lebanons resources. So in a way it's already outside syria's borders.

But that's still no reason for the Us to get involved in any way.

[stratos]

In this particular case I would prefer for some sort of Joint US/Canada offer to help with peace negotiations. We are countries not involved, not of the region and have IMO very little vested intrest in who is who so kind of makes us(US and Canada) the perfect negotiators.

Can't claim we want their oil, they don't have any, Can't claim we are biased aginst the religion sense all parties are of the Islamic faith. The more I think on it the more curious I am why Pres. Obama does not go down this route of dimplomicy.

[xerxes]

Me too. I can't understand why he's doing this. I seriously thought he knew better. He said he wouldn't involve the US in any dumb wars in the Middle East and this is the dumbest war of all.

Is old man McCain and his butt buddy Sen. Butters running the show now? Cause this is their wet dream. As it is the wet dream of all the neo-con war pigs who still have jobs in DC as well as misguided liberal interventionists.

The US is taking sides in a civil war and no good will come of it whatsoever. What if the rebels overthrow Assad? Then all the Christians and Alawites will be massacred. Then maybe the rebel groups who say they're preldged to al Qaeda come into control of the chemical weapons.

Colour me seriously dissapointed in Obama for the first time.

[stratos]

$1:

Then maybe the rebel groups who say they're preldged to al Qaeda come into control of the chemical weapons.

This, IMO, is the only reason and a weak one at that for getting involved. Yet that would mean we sided with Assad so why backing the rebels. I am seriously tring to wrap my brain on why we should back either side and am finding very little reason at all.

[Zipperfish]

$1:

He [Mr Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to Mr Obama] said intelligence officials had a "high confidence" in their assessment, and also estimated that 100 to 150 people had died from chemical weapons attacks, "however, casualty data is likely incomplete".

High confidence. Haven't we seen this movie already?

[N_Fiddledog]

Almost 70% of Americans oppose military involvement in Syria. The One will have a difficult sell on this one, I think.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162854/ameri ... syria.aspx