Military strikes on Syria - Yes or No ?

[katydid23]

Originally Posted by gramcracker
appears that the US is moving closer to the idea of training Syrian rebels in Jordan in addition to ongoing CIA training there, on using communications and weapons supplied by some Gulf states

the proposed plan would allow 100s/1000s to be trained instead of dozens===============================================

This whole thing sounds scarily similar to the tasks we took on on Afghanistan and Iraq. Training a ragtag army is not that easy, especially when some of them want to kill you in your sleep.

 

[Sonya610]

This whole thing sounds scarily similar to the tasks we took on on Afghanistan and Iraq. Training a ragtag army is not that easy, especially when some of them want to kill you in your sleep.

Sounds more like when we sent arms and gave advice to the rebels in Afghanistan fighting the Russians. Some of those freedom fighters went on to become leaders in the Taliban, Al Queda, and many other radical groups.

We will be arming and training future enemy soldiers that have no reason whatsoever to be loyal to the US after the war, course only a fool would turn down free arms and training even from an enemy in a crisis.

 

[Gardenlady]

Yeah, this is one of those times where we really need to LEARN FROM HISTORY so we do not repeat it...

I note that many of the hawks from the Bush II administration are speaking in favor of action. Are all the moderate folks from the Reagan administration dead or too sick to speak up? (Serious question - they've got to be fairly up there in years now, so I don't know). One would hope they'd try to make themselves heard about what can happen when we take sides in a conflict that isn't our business, and arm a bunch of people who don't like us very much... :facepalm:

 

[Elley Mae]

Others say that by using gas against its own civilians Syria is violating taboos built up over more than a century that need to be defended. “We signed up for over 100 years to not use these weapons,” Ms. Kidd of King’s College said, “and if we just stand by and not do anything, what is the value of the treaty and the norm?”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/07/world/middleeast/a-weapon-seen-as-too-horrible-even-in-war.html?hp

The Geneva Protocol was not even the first effort to ban the use of poison in war, said Joanna Kidd of King’s College London. “Throughout history, there has been a general revulsion against the use of poisons against human beings in warfare, going back to the Greeks,” she said. Some date a first effort to ban such weaponry to 1675, when France and the Holy Roman Empire agreed in Strasbourg not to use poisoned bullets.

 

[Sonya610]

Others say that by using gas against its own civilians Syria is violating taboos built up over more than a century that need to be defended.

And that assumes that Assad is behind the chemical attacks. We all know chemical weapons create hysteria (we went to war with Iraq because the government claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction).

If someone wanted to provoke the involvement of foreign governments in that civil war then the use of chemical weapons with massive media attention would be the best plan! Assad does NOT want foreign military involvement so I don't think he is behind this.

BTW....the US Government AND the U.N. knew that Saddam was using chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers during the Iraq/Iran war. Not only did everyone look the other way but the US was sending Saddam billions AND sending the chemicals to make the weapons!

Israel got away with using white phosphorus bombs in crowded civilian areas for ages. Babies being burned to death by those explosives and the U.S. along with the U.N. let them keep doing it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/25/israel-army-white-phosphorous_n_3157604.html

 

[Elley Mae]

A Short History of Bio-Chemical Weapons

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/02/a-short-history-of-bio-chemical-weapons/

http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/07/12/israel-high-court-rejects-legal-ban-white-phosphorus

White phosphorus generates a dense white smoke and ignites on contact with oxygen. It is considered an incendiary rather than a chemical munition, and is not banned by international treaty. However, the use in populated areas of white phosphorus munitions, which spread burning toxic substance over large areas, violates the prohibition against attacks that cannot discriminate between civilians and combatants, Human Rights Watch said.

bbm

 

[Elley Mae]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...E&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-09-07-08-22-09/

After meeting with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, the EU ministers ended days of division on the issue with a statement saying the available intelligence "seems to indicate strong evidence that the Syrian regime is responsible for these attacks."

 

[Gardenlady]

The Pope has called for Catholics, other Christians, and all men and women of goodwill of all faiths or none to fast and pray for peace in Syria today.

Saw this come across my FB today. Written by a Syrian Jesuit, a very moving letter/prayer, thought I would share it here:

http://thejesuitpost.org/site/2013/09/a-prayer-for-syria/

 

[MsFacetious]

Men lying on a tile floor, shirtless and convulsing. Children, too, seemingly unable to control their shaking and flailing. Panic and screams in the background.

These are some of the hard-to-stomach images that the Obama administration has shown a select group of senators in closed-door briefings to make the case that a limited military attack on Syria is justified.

CNN has obtained 13 different videos that the administration has told the Senate Intelligence Committee depict the gruesome scene of a chemical weapons attack in Syria on August 21.

The attack, allegedly carried out by Syrian forces under President Bashar al-Assad, has touched off the most critical foreign policy question since the uprising began in 2011: Is a military response merited?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/07/politics/us-syria-chemical-attack-videos/index.html?hpt=hp_t1


'Am I alive? Am I alive?'

A doctor tells of a young Syrian girl's panicked cries after an attack and his fears of further human suffering with more strikes.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/world/2013/08/30/syria-pkg-damon-lebanon-refugees.cnn.html


I feel like we now have the option to watch the start of the Holocaust in video. lease:

 

[katydid23]

Someone gassed those poor Syrians. But I am still not 100% convinced that it was Assad, himself, who did so.

But even if it was, how is our decision to send air strikes going to help the civilians? I feel like we are going to kill more innocents by doing so. JMO

 

[MsFacetious]

Someone gassed those poor Syrians. But I am still not 100% convinced that it was Assad, himself, who did so.

But even if it was, how is our decision to send air strikes going to help the civilians? I feel like we are going to kill more innocents by doing so. JMO

I don't know... I've wondered what could have been done differently/sooner in the Holocaust too.
I didn't come up with any answers. But I do hope that this ends, one way or another. :twocents:

 

[ellie b]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...E&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-09-07-08-22-09/

After meeting with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, the EU ministers ended days of division on the issue with a statement saying the available intelligence "seems to indicate strong evidence that the Syrian regime is responsible for these attacks."

Opinions differ amongst politicians.....

But Republican Representative Justin Amash, who opposes U.S. intervention in Syria, suggested classified briefings would make no difference. "If Americans could read classified docs, they'd be even more against Syria action," he tweeted.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/08/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE9860L020130908

The Obama administration hasn’t proven “a compelling national security interest” or provided a clearly defined mission for an assault, Pryor said today in a statement. “Based on the information presented to me and the evidence I have gathered, I do not believe these criteria have been met, and I cannot support military action against Syria at this time.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-07/democratic-pryor-opposes-a-syria-strike-at-this-time-.html

 

[Sonya610]

MoveOn was one of Obama's biggest campaign supporters, but Anna Galland, its executive director, told AP Saturday that the organization is following the will of its members. During a recent 24-hour vote, more than 70 percent of MoveOn's members came out against military strikes, she said.

Galland said the group "will stand closely" with Obama on other issues, such as the implementation of his health care law. But on Syria, "we had a very clear mandate from our members to go out strongly on this," she said. "This is a big moment."

Obama said Aug. 31 that he had decided the U.S. should act but also said he wanted congressional support, which has already resulted in numerous classified briefings at the White House and on Capitol Hill and Secretary of State John Kerry testifying publicly at two congressional hearings earlier this week.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ort-ahead-obama-tuesday-speech/#ixzz2eJ88dhq6

Interesting article, MoveOn.org is paying for lots of television ads denouncing Syrian strikes.

We all know Obama was hurt over his gun legislation being shot down, this will be another huge blow if Congress won't back him yet again.

If congress votes it down (and it looks like they will) will Obama decide to strike anyway?

 

[21merc7]

Interesting article, MoveOn.org is paying for lots of television ads denouncing Syrian strikes.

We all know Obama was hurt over his gun legislation being shot down, this will be another huge blow if Congress won't back him yet again.

If congress votes it down (and it looks like they will) will Obama decide to strike anyway?

Good question. I have noticed Obama seems to express more self standing this last term, you can see him holding back some upset.

I don't know what is best here. I am not in politics. I'm just a terrified citizen, happy for the moment that I live in the U.S., but terrified that Syria wants us to strike so they have an excuse to employ this exact thing here, or something similar.

God help the Syrian citizens! lease:

It just makes no sense to me.

 

[Elley Mae]

SYRIA IN CONTEXT: UNDERSTANDING THE WAR

http://www.reuters.com/places/syria

 

[Sonya610]

I'm just a terrified citizen, happy for the moment that I live in the U.S., but terrified that Syria wants us to strike so they have an excuse to employ this exact thing here, or something similar.

Oh I wouldn't worry about attacks here. They don't care about attacking the US (except when they want us to be used as a pawn to start a war over there or whatever, as was the case with 9/11).

The attacks will stay in the middle east as that is what they all care about and also where the folks they really hate (and love) live. Some may not like the US but they all care far more about their own lands. A pressure cooker or two may be set off by random crazies but the organized forces will focus their efforts closer to home.

Having said, US targets will likely be hit in some countries like Lebanon (and that may also be used to justify a war if an embassy was attacked or whatever).

 

[Gardenlady]

Interesting article, MoveOn.org is paying for lots of television ads denouncing Syrian strikes.

We all know Obama was hurt over his gun legislation being shot down, this will be another huge blow if Congress won't back him yet again.

If congress votes it down (and it looks like they will) will Obama decide to strike anyway?

He might, given his track record. Those of us on the far or progressive left have long been disappointed with president Obama vs candidate Obama, and so I for one will not be surprised if he strikes anyway. He will get some credit from some for putting it to a debate, but can also say he followed his convictions.

 

[Gardenlady]

Oh I wouldn't worry about attacks here. They don't care about attacking the US (except when they want us to be used as a pawn to start a war over there or whatever, as was the case with 9/11).

The attacks will stay in the middle east as that is what they all care about and also where the folks they really hate (and love) live. Some may not like the US but they all care far more about their own lands. A pressure cooker or two may be set off by random crazies but the organized forces will focus their efforts closer to home.

Having said, US targets will likely be hit in some countries like Lebanon (and that may also be used to justify a war if an embassy was attacked or whatever).

Yes. for thise who are terrified, remember, you have a better chance of dying in a bathroom accident than you do of being hurt in a terrorist attack.

 

[Elley Mae]

Doubts Linger Over Syria Gas Attack Evidence

The Obama administration maintains it intercepted communications from a senior Syrian official on the use of chemical weapons, but requests to see that transcript have been denied. So has a request by the AP to see a transcript of communications allegedly ordering Syrian military personnel to prepare for a chemical weapons attack by readying gas masks.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/lingering-doubts-syria-gas-attack-evidence-20191332

Casualty estimates by other groups are far lower: The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says it only counts victims identified by name, and that its current total stands at 502. It has questioned the U.S. number and urged the Obama administration to release the information its figure is based on. The AP also has repeatedly asked for clarification on those numbers.

Hisham Jaber, a retired Lebanese army general who closely follows Syria's war, said it would be "political suicide" for the regime to commit such an act given Obama's warning. He also questioned U.S. assertions that the Syrian rebel fighters could not have launched sophisticated chemical weapons. He said that some among the estimated 70,000 defectors from the Syrian military, many of them now fighting for the opposition, could have been trained to use them.

Saudi Arabia has been a chief supporter of the opposition. Prince Bandar bin Sultan, head of Saudi intelligence, recently flew to Moscow, reportedly on a mission to get Russia to drop its support for Assad.

 

[ellie b]

SYRIA IN CONTEXT: UNDERSTANDING THE WAR

http://www.reuters.com/places/syria

Yes, IMO....I believe that anyone who thinks this is simply about a tyrannical leader who has attacked his people with chemicals and should be stopped/reprimanded, is very naïve. Personally, having looked at the situation in Syria and the Middle East in general, I believe that the way in which various outside governments (I mean all of them, no-one specific) have interfered by arming and supporting all sides of conflict (even if they truly do think it is for the greater good) is not working out well for any-one.
Instability, violence, tyranny abounds, things have become very convoluted and complicated. No-one wants to back down in case it gives their opposite number more power, and I can kinda understand that (self-preservation). But, if humanitarian issues are really of paramount importance to all the various governments involved here then they would never have allowed (even caused) things to go this far.

This is all just my own opinion, I have tried to look at things from an impartial, fact-based point of view.