Syria: What should the US do/not do?

Jonny7

CS Hasuki wrote: »

LOL WHATS A CREDIBLE SOURCE JONNY? If you watch the video all sources are listed within.

You claimed 4.5 million have died in Iraq, it's up to you to back that figure up.

Highly arguable figures presented by a professor who refers to Israel as Jewistan and appears to be obsessed by Zionist plots is probably not the most objective source on the matter

CS Hasuki

Jonny7 wrote: »

You claimed 4.5 million have died in Iraq, it's up to you to back that figure up.

Highly arguable figures presented by a professor who refers to Israel as Jewistan and appears to be obsessed by Zionist plots is probably not the most objective source on the matter

Or you could go look yourself. You have not backed up anything you have said so far, because you have been wrong on every point.

Jonny7

CS Hasuki wrote: »

Or you could go look yourself.

If someone makes a claim, the onos is on them to back it up.

I've seen a lot of figures for Iraq, ranging from the Lancet report to local reports over the years - I have never seen anything approaching a figure of 4.5 million dead - even when linked to US santions - unless someone is being deliberately manipulative of the figures

You have not backed up anything you have said so far, because you have been wrong on every point.

Perhaps I am completely wrong, but I'd like to know which points these are?

CS Hasuki

Jonny7 wrote: »

If someone makes a claim, the onos is on them to back it up.

I've seen a lot of figures for Iraq, ranging from the Lancet report to local reports over the years - I have never seen anything approaching a figure of 4.5 million dead - even when linked to US santions - unless someone is being deliberately manipulative of the figures



Perhaps I am completely wrong, but I'd like to know which points these are?

It's up to you to support your claims, as you put it. Show me some evidence for all of your claims so far. You have made quite a few so get cracking

Jonny7

CS Hasuki wrote: »

It's up to you to support your claims, as you put it. Show me some evidence for all of your claims so far. You have made quite a few so get cracking

Well go on then, which ones?

CS Hasuki

Jonny7 wrote: »

Well go on then, which ones?

All of them Jonny. ALL of them. Prove me wrong.

Jonny7

CS Hasuki wrote: »

All of them Jonny. ALL of them. Prove me wrong.

Asking someone to "prove" everything they've said in a thread over 19 pages is perhaps a little unrealistic and abstract

but..

If there's a particular point you don't agree with.. I will be more than glad to provide evidence or back it up - that's a pretty normal procedure here.

CS Hasuki

Jonny7 wrote: »

Asking someone to "prove" everything they've said in a thread over 19 pages is perhaps a little unrealistic and abstract

but..

If there's a particular point you don't agree with.. I will be more than glad to provide evidence or back it up - that's a pretty normal procedure here.

Don't worry about mate, I made my point of view clear as have you.

InTheTrees

CS Hasuki wrote: »

Similar to the jews in WW2. But hey whats a few rag heads. :rolleyes:

Thats revealing. I dont see how its relevant at all.

CS Hasuki

InTheTrees wrote: »

Thats revealing. I dont see how its relevant at all.

The large amount of Iraq people who have died because of USA sanctions & war is not relevant to the post on US invading Iraq under false pretense?

You use that confused icon a lot.

InTheTrees

CS Hasuki wrote: »

The large amount of Iraq people who have died because of USA sanctions & war is not relevant to the post on US invading Iraq under false pretense?

?? If you look at my post:

CS Hasuki wrote: »

Similar to the jews in WW2. But hey whats a few rag heads.

I was curious about why you brought that up?

CS Hasuki

InTheTrees wrote: »

?? If you look at my post:



I was curious about why you brought that up?

Because it is the greatest atrocity in "modern" history. Everyone on the planet is made aware of it and seeing footage of what went on would make anyone's skin crawl. Exact figure will never be known.

Iraq on the other hand, it's all cloak and dagger, half a million kids dead through sanctions was worth it according to Madeleine Albright. War crimes exposed by manning go unpunished. Admitted chemical weapon use, torture, International law urinated on and people want to forget is as fast as possible.
It's treated as a woops, our bad, no WMDs but he was a bad man anyway so go team America.
To hell with the men women and children who never did a damn thing wrong who were slaughtered.

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

If you've made up your mind then there is little I can say to change it

I marched against the war in Iraq but thanks

If you marched against Iraq and somehow stand by what the US has done since you are truly a lost person.

I feel sorry for you Jonny.

You have made your mind up. I was surprised by how Russia acted in Syria recently. They stood up to the US.

Am I wrong? The US has invaded quite a lot of countries in the recent decades.

If I were involved in Propaganda, I be so happy to have you as a citizen.

Jonny7

sin_city wrote: »

You have made your mind up. I was surprised by how Russia acted in Syria recently. They stood up to the US.

It's standard politics and posturing. They didn't stand up to the yanks, they out-maneuvered them. Whatever doubt you may have about US concern over humanitarianism - the Russians have none.

Am I wrong? The US has invaded quite a lot of countries in the recent decades.

By that logic so have France, they seem to get off the hook lightly

If I were involved in Propaganda, I be so happy to have you as a citizen.

thankyou comrade

Dracula88

It is about time the US stay out of foreign affairs and mind their own business. I firmly believe that US foreign policy can only triumph through the suppression of other nations ie. Vietnam,Iran,Iraq . In 1953 the CIA backed a coup to oust democratically elected president Mohammed Mossadeq another example of how US foreign policy depends on the suppression of other nations . US should adopt the old policy of Isolationism.

MonaPizza

Dracula88 wrote: »

It is about time the US stay out of foreign affairs and mind their own business. I firmly believe that US foreign policy can only triumph through the suppression of other nations ie. Vietnam,Iran,Iraq . In 1953 the CIA backed a coup to oust democratically elected president Mohammed Mossadeq another example of how US foreign policy depends on the suppression of other nations . US should adopt the old policy of Isolationism.

Isolationism? :pac:

When has the US ever been "isolationist"?
They have been fcuking with other countries since the early 1800's

Canada, Mexico, The Phillipines, Cuba, Panama, Guatamala, Hawaii, Honduras, China, Venezuela,

The Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny....and that was all before World War 1.

"old policy of isolationism" .... are you for real?

ChicagoJoe

Dracula88 wrote: »

It is about time the US stay out of foreign affairs and mind their own business. I firmly believe that US foreign policy can only triumph through the suppression of other nations ie. Vietnam,Iran,Iraq . In 1953 the CIA backed a coup to oust democratically elected president Mohammed Mossadeq another example of how US foreign policy depends on the suppression of other nations . US should adopt the old policy of Isolationism.

Yep the US has been involved in some cock ups ( I'm more of a Michael Moore/Chomsky type of American rather than a gun toting member of the NRA or something ). Syria is almost an impossible one to call. If we are concerned about a sinkhole for America, Syria would compete well with Iraq and Afghanistan. Regardless Obama has painted the US into a corner by his saber rattling when what he should have been doing was recognizing that this is a chess game.

Jonny7

ChicagoJoe wrote: »

Yep the US has been involved in some cock ups ( I'm more of a Michael Moore/Chomsky type of American rather than a gun toting member of the NRA or something ). Syria is almost an impossible one to call. If we are concerned about a sinkhole for America, Syria would compete well with Iraq and Afghanistan. Regardless Obama has painted the US into a corner by his saber rattling when what he should have been doing was recognizing that this is a chess game.

It's only a chess game to those who can afford to play with no repercussions back home - am reminded of countries that have no strong opposition, nor questioning press nor fierce public opinion on anything to do with such foreign policy

People are dying, lives are being destroyed every day. Any meaningful attempt to change the situation is being deliberately obstructed for sheer political reasons.

Obama/Cameron/Hollande/Merkel/etc need to sit back and do nothing, because shouldering any responsibility will mean they to carry the legacy of Iraq, Afghanistan, the cost, all the risk - and for what? a potentially worse situation because other players will sabotage it? **** that.

It's a fools game. Stay away from the cauldron, don't get burned, partake in the meaningless "peace processes" and everyone is happy, except for the Syrians who are trapped in a grinding machine, ruining hundreds of thousands of lives every month.

MonaPizza

Be like Nutella wrote: »

Issues:

• The possible use of chemical weapons.
• The extremist groups within the anti-Assad side.
• Whether to arm or not arm?
• Can a No Fly Zone (NFZ) be instigated easily and maintained easily?
• Should there be boots on the ground under any circumstances?
• What would be the ultimate goal in getting further involved?
• If the US gets militarily involved is Syria just destined to become another drawn out Iraq? (where between 150,000-300,000 are deemed to have died since Saddam left power)

For my part I think the primary concern should be a global concern with the atrocities which have happened in the last 2 years and some kind of combined effort should be made by the international community to stop the bloodshed, get Assad and his guys out of power (by force) and get the Syrians to a table to build a new Syria. It may be 'pie in the sky' thinking to a large degree but that's what I think nonetheless.

The US should lead this effort and the primary goal should be a humanitarian one above everything else. Humanitarian first, then nation building contributions, democracy building over many years after that.

Build a coalition. Call him a war criminal. Give him an ultimatum to step aside, offer him and his people a safe haven if they leave without further bloodshed. Get the main anti-Assad parties together and do your best to convince them that none of them will have a majority and killing each other for decades isn't going to be any better than Syria under Assad. That's all you can do really.

But just watching these people massacre each other and risking a wider regional destabilization (which is already an issue) is no longer the smartest move. Doing nothing is now more dangerous.

This needs pro-action. Whatever action is chosen needs to be viewed as regionally popular (ignoring Iran which doesn't count as an opinion in this particular case). We need a US/European/Gulf partnership - they need to come together and put the cards on the table and choose a path forward - The primary goal needs to be a Humanitarian one - to stop Assad becoming more and more desperate killing more and more people with chemical and heavy weapons. There obviously needs to be a plan in place about how to deal with Al Qaeda who are present there already and will take years to root out.

There is no peace process potential in this between the lions (Assad) and the lambs. We're beyond that point. Assad and his Alawites are petrified they'll be killed, jailed, rounded up, dominated etc etc and they are right to be scared so whatever international coalition comes together needs to take care of these Alawites. There are 2.5 million of them in Syria - they have been the minority elite leadership for 40 years since Assad's father ruled and their time is over. They're out. Finding a way to assure their protection once Assad is gone is the key to this process.

I'm more than aware that atrocities have been carried out by both Assad's forces AND groups within the rising. But Assad has killed the vast majority of people and the vast majority of those people killed have been innocent civilians on which he has used the states military. He mowed down people protesting which started this whole thing.

70-80,000 have been killed so far in the 2 years since this kicked off. Obama is currently trying to make some space to make a decision about this thing by debating the accusations of Assad's use of chemical weapons on his own people i.e. moving his 'Red Line'. He'll be forced to make a decision soon enough because his credibility is coming under pressure what with the Iran thing and North Korea thing putting the global media spotlight on Obama's 'Balls'.

What's the thoughts? No point in abusing each other here or making sweeping statements about how evil the US is or is not, I just want to know what people think the US (with/without partners) could, should, should not do to help this thing?

Could be one of those Damned if ya do-Damned if ya don't kinda things but I just think the US has a leading role whether they like it or not and they'll be judged very harshly if they bottle it here. But I'm not necessarily saying that the US should send in its guys either. Clinton chose not to intervene in Rwanda in 94 and in 3 months more than half a million people were hacked to death by Machetes.

The US can do something here - it's just a matter of what to do?

Any opinions with Military insight would be appreciated also. i.e. the reality of instigating a NFZ, how many pieces involved in Assad's air force, air defenses and Radar, what weapons would be required, how long would such a campaign take to complete etc etc

I'm going to go out on a limb here and ask a simple question....nah, I might actually ask a few very simple questions. But we'll start with this one.

1. Why are you asking questions about what one country, i.e. the US who have killed more people in the hot and cold wars since 1945 than the Nazis gassed in Auschwitz, Dachau, Birkenau, Treblinka, Sobibor, Sachsenhausen, Belsen, Majdanek...and so many more? Why are these tasked to save lives when they destroy is so cavalierly?

2. Why is Syria so dangerous NOW and it wasn't 100, or 40 or 10 years ago?

3. In 2005...8 years ago, we were warned by the dopes in Washington (mind you ...the slope-shouldered **** like Bolton and Perle and a few other tits) that Iran would be "red" (nuclear) by the end of the year. Still waiting, cretins!

4. Why aren't we bombing Niger to rags? After all don't they have all that yellowcake sh1t that can blow a hole in the universe and they gave a load of it to Saddam Hussein?

5. Why aren't the Brits and Americans bombing Riyadh. Poor stupid cow got flogged to death there last week for snogging the bloke she loved.

Ahhh! Love!

cyberhog

It seems concerns over Jihadist groups have prompted a rethink on Assad.

“We need to start talking to the Assad regime again” about counterterrorism and other issues of shared concern, said Ryan C. Crocker, a veteran diplomat who has served in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. “It will have to be done very, very quietly. But bad as Assad is, he is not as bad as the jihadis who would take over in his absence.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/04/world/middleeast/jihadist-groups-gain-in-turmoil-across-middle-east.html?hp&_r=1&

cyberhog

The "moderate" rebels are finished. The extremists are now the main opposition in Syria.

“For all practical purposes, the moderate armed opposition that the administration really wanted to support — albeit in a hesitant and halfhearted way — is now on the sidelines,” said Frederic C. Hof, who as a State Department official worked on plans for a political transition in Syria and is now a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/world/middleeast/us-suspends-nonlethal-aid-to-syrian-rebels-in-north.html?ref=world

The White House strategy in Syria has been based on supporting so-called moderate elements in the armed opposition fighting to oust the government of President Bashar Assad.

But reports from inside Syria indicate that Al Qaeda groups and other militant Islamist militias -- some supported by Saudi Arabia, a close U.S. ally -- are emerging as the most powerful factions in the deeply fractured opposition ranks.

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-us-aid-syria-suspended-20131211,0,3840278.story#axzz2nGVVM9TB

The extremists have seized a lot of weapons from warehouses that were holding U.S. military gear for "moderate" rebels.

[A senior FSA Supreme Military Council official] said that the Islamic Front raided a total of ten warehouses belonging to the Western-backed umbrella group and seized a significant arsenal of weaponry, including 2,000 AK-47 rifles, 1,000 assorted arms—including M79 Osa rocket launchers, rocket-propelled grenades, and 14.5mm heavy machine guns—in addition to more than 200 tons of ammunition. At least 100 FSA military vehicles were also taken in the attack.

FSA spokesman Luay Al-Miqdad told Reuters that the Islamic Front had replaced the FSA flag over the base with one of their own.

http://www.aawsat.net/2013/12/article55324955

The turn of events was the strongest sign yet that the U.S.-allied FSA is collapsing under the pressure of Islamist domination of the rebel side of the war. It also weakened the Obama administration's hand as it struggles to organize a peace conference next month bringing together rebels and the regime.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304202204579252021900591220

For the last two years the West has been trying to get rid of Assad and what do they have to show for it? An opposition that is now dominated by extremists. Assad can not go now, he is the only legitimate power in Syria.

Once again Western meddling has brought nothing but chaos to the Middle East. Obama and Cameron should be flogged for interfering in Syria's affairs.

Jonny7

Of course he is legitimate - he was handed power by his father and only ever held sham elections - can't get more legitimate than that

This is a man who's forces are currently rolling barrel bombs packed with nails out of helicopters into residential areas, but let's just ignore that. The main agenda here is to keep passing the buck.

cyberhog

New analysis of rocket used in Syria chemical attack suggests "the US Government’s Interpretation of the Technical Intelligence It Gathered Prior to and After the August 21 Attack CANNOT POSSIBLY BE CORRECT"

The report also states "the Indigenous Chemical Munition Could Be Manufactured By Anyone Who Has Access to a Machine Shop With Modest Capabilities That Is, the Claim Is Incorrect that Only the Syrian Government Could Manufacture the Munition."


Possible Implications of Faulty Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013

two wheels good

MonaPizza wrote: »

4. Why aren't we bombing Niger to rags? After all don't they have all that yellowcake sh1t that can blow a hole in the universe and they gave a load of it to Saddam Hussein?

Ahhh! Love!

Point of order.....
Are you referring to the story published just prior to the Iraq invasion, March 2003, that claimed Iraq was buying uranium from Niger.

That turned out to be such a pile of lies and unconvincing fake documents that the US stopped using the claim as justification for the invasion. It didn't stop T Blair though.

Jonny7

cyberhog wrote: »

New analysis of rocket used in Syria chemical attack suggests "the US Government’s Interpretation of the Technical Intelligence It Gathered Prior to and After the August 21 Attack CANNOT POSSIBLY BE CORRECT"

The report also states "the Indigenous Chemical Munition Could Be Manufactured By Anyone Who Has Access to a Machine Shop With Modest Capabilities That Is, the Claim Is Incorrect that Only the Syrian Government Could Manufacture the Munition."


Possible Implications of Faulty Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013

Is there evidence of the rebels carrying out this attack, if so, when? who? how?

All we have so far is footage of X using those munitions, using that type of delivery method, having that type of chemical and quantity needed, and firing it from X's position into Y's position

We have nothing whatsoever to indicate Y did it

Yet there seems to be a small but determined effort to implicate Y

This makes little or no logical sense.

As an aside, a defector from inside the regime has brought 55,000 images of approx 11,000 bodies from Syria with obvious signs of starvation, beatings, electrocution, eyes missing.

Those that argue the regime is either incapable or "the victim" in this situation need to seriously re-examine their view

Cork boy 55

Jonny7 wrote: »

(...)

As an aside, a defector from inside the regime has brought 55,000 images of approx 11,000 bodies from Syria with obvious signs of starvation, beatings, electrocution, eyes missing.

Those that argue the regime is either incapable or "the victim" in this situation need to seriously re-examine their view

The regime murders and destruction of property is of a order of magnitude greater than insurgents there's no comparison in killing power and firepower
The two sides are in a different league, This is stated in ever UN report on human rights abuses released.

I speculated earlier that tens of thousands of people had been liquidated in detention centers by regime.
Judging by the stunning smoking gun evidenced of this military police photographer defector it looks like this is true
11,000 estimated for that that one detention center alone.

David Crane one of the report's authors. , the first chief prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, indicted former Liberian President Charles Taylor
This is a smoking gun,Any prosecutor would like this kind of evidence -- the photos and the process. This is direct evidence of the regime's killing machine.
"It's a callous, industrial machine grinding its citizens, It is industrial age mass killing."

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/20/world/syria-torture-photos-amanpour/

Cork boy 55

Reuters
Syrian government theories that rebels used nerve gas are 'poor:' U.N. expert
BEIRUT Thu Jan 30, 2014 11:31am EST

Syrian authorities who blamed the opposition for a deadly sarin gas attack last August have failed to present a plausible theory for how the rebels could have obtained the nerve agent, a U.N. investigator said in an interview published on Thursday.

France, Britain and the United States accused the government of President Bashar al-Assad of carrying out the August 21 attack in which hundreds of people, including women and children, were killed. Syria and its ally Russia said it was rebel fighters who unleashed the chemical weapon.

Without categorically saying which side was to blame, chief United Nations investigator Ake Sellstrom said it was "difficult to see" how the opposition could have weaponized the toxins.

He told CBRNe World, a specialist publication on chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats, that he had asked Syrian authorities several times to back up their claim that rebels fired the weapons.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/30/us-syria-crisis-chemical-idUSBREA0S19720140130

MonaPizza

Jonny7 wrote: »

It's only a chess game to those who can afford to play with no repercussions back home - am reminded of countries that have no strong opposition, nor questioning press nor fierce public opinion on anything to do with such foreign policy

People are dying, lives are being destroyed every day. Any meaningful attempt to change the situation is being deliberately obstructed for sheer political reasons.

Obama/Cameron/Hollande/Merkel/etc need to sit back and do nothing, because shouldering any responsibility will mean they to carry the legacy of Iraq, Afghanistan, the cost, all the risk - and for what? a potentially worse situation because other players will sabotage it? **** that.

It's a fools game. Stay away from the cauldron, don't get burned, partake in the meaningless "peace processes" and everyone is happy, except for the Syrians who are trapped in a grinding machine, ruining hundreds of thousands of lives every month.

Well well, you almost sound like you care.