Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Syria: A dangerous proposition

September 4, 2013

President Barack Obama finally has decided to submit the decision on war with Syria to Congress....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(64)

DarkStar

Sep-09-13 4:12 PM

Well it really depends on who your talking to.

For example, according to US laws our military is using WMD every day.

Check out this VERY interesting story in Forbes for a breakdown

www dot forbes dot com/sites/michaelpeck/2013/04/29/974/

It also reference this story from the Washington Post where an former US soldier was changed with conspiracy to use a WMD for firing an RPG at a Syrian military chopper while fighting with the rebels in Syria.

*******articles.washingtonpost dot com/2013-03-28/world/38099269_1_affidavit-al-nusra-syrian-rebel-group

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Sep-09-13 12:52 PM

Judeye, you can find a person on the street who will say almost anything you want them to say. Of course they want the US to get involved. They’re involved in the middle of a Civil War and they want the US to help them overthrow the government. What else would we expect them to say?

When have we ever seen a non-violent protest in the Middle East? Every protest there has the radicals who get the protestors fired up and the authorities respond which leads to riots.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Sep-09-13 12:47 PM

Joew & DarakStar..I get my definition of a WMD from the amount of training I received when in the military on what a chemical attack was and how to survive it; they were never referred to as WMD’s. Today’s definition of a WMD was given us by the news media. Nukes along with some very powerful conventional munitions are WMD’s. I was certified under the PRP program to work on nuclear armed aircraft. It’s almost impossible to comprehend the destructive firepower of just one nuclear armed B-52; one commander tried to liken it to 26 million fully loaded B-17’s. The Neutron Bomb was killed by President Carter. The Neutron Bomb basically took the horrors of war out of it. Death, along with destruction, is what makes war the terrible thing it is. Ever get the chance, watch the Star Trek episode “A Taste of Armageddon” as it gives the perfect lesson of war without the destruction.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Sep-09-13 11:24 AM

Judeye let me set you straight about the 1986 bombing of Libya by President Reagan. 11 Days prior to the attack dubbed "ElDorado Canyon" agents of Libya in conjunction with their Stasi friends set off a large bomb in the LaBelle nightclub in Berlin. It was a favorite watering hole for Americans. 3 Americans were killed and over 70 injured. Diplomatic cables were intercepted which proved the regime in Tripoli was responsible. Americans were killed Judeye and Americans were maimed Judeye. President Reagan did in fact consult with both sides of the aisle before launching the attack. He then bombed the crap out of them. You left the above part out Judeye. BIG difference!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

Sep-09-13 10:43 AM

Phil,

That has been my problem with this incident from the start, and considering the limited scope of the attack, and the fact that it wasn't against a rebel HQ or troop concentration.

Now don't doubt the government would use gas attacks if they needed to do so to protect a vital military or governmental location. Since at that point it's all or nothing, but the area they hit was basically a civilian area with a relative small number or rebel forces around.

Can anyone say that some of these rebel groups, if they gained access to a limited number of chemical weapons, wouldn't use them against civilians in their own areas in an attempt to get outside forces to attack government forces and installations?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bulldog10

Sep-09-13 10:40 AM

Can we really win anything in the middle east?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

American

Sep-09-13 10:00 AM

This administration says ""The common-sense test says he is responsible for this. He should be held to account," McDonough said of the Syrian leader who for two years has resisted calls from inside and outside his country to step down." So tell me where the proof of who done it is. And what makes his "common sense" better then anyone else's. And there is also the fact that Assad will strike back at US soil if we go in. But I know if you are an Obama backer like judeye none of that matters. Just do what he says. You don't need proof if Obama says it.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Sep-09-13 9:01 AM

I'm not taking sides but how do we know for sure that it was not the rebel forces that used the gas knowing that it would draw America into the conflict? We quickly blame Assad for the deaths but keep in mind that in 2003 WE KNEW FOR SURE THAT IRAQ HAD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION! Our intelligence may be deeply flawed so we might be very careful before we pull the trigger.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

Sep-09-13 8:55 AM

stangv8,

So according your definition of WMD a neutron isn' a WMD either since it only kills people and doesn't destroy the buildings?

The line between conventional weapons and WMD is imaginary and was created by politicians for psychological purposes.

Consider that weapons such as the MOAB, napalm and even thermoberic weapons are considered conventional arms despite their enormous destuctive power but any one of them is capable of obliterating an entire neighborhood and most, if not all, all it's residents as effectively as any chemical weapon could. And in fact, possibly even more effective since there are some very effective defenses against chemical weapons.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Sep-09-13 8:12 AM

A government responding to a non violent protest with violence and death? Kent State anyone? NOT OUR BUSINESS...did Russia or China bomb the US in the name of teaching the government a lesson for Kent State? Stay out of Syria...this is not our fight nor should it be. ANd for all you people screaming we have the duty for humanity...where are the screams for that duty while North Korea has hundreds of thousands in "re-education" (concentration) camps?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Sep-09-13 7:23 AM

Sorry for the GMO comment. It was a lame attempt at making light of a very serious issue.

I am not sure what is going on in Syria, except that people, many of them children are dying and millions have been displaced.

I have heard interviews from people living in Syria. I have read the reports coming out from Syria..by people involved. They are begging us to intervene. Remember how this all began, as non violent protests. The government then responded with violence. Since then it has escalated. (if anyone wants the links..I will give them) To me, there is NO doubt we must respond. How we respond though, that is at question.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Sep-09-13 7:11 AM

joew..the fact that Congress had NOT authorized Reagan to use military action was the point.

I do not remember all this screaming when he did it, about needing the Congress ..did you? Why is it that so mnay things that past presidents did without the public outcry, when Pres Obama does the exact same, there are cries for his impeachment?

My point and the point of the article I quoted from as well.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Sep-08-13 7:49 PM

I guess we differ a bit on the term "mass destruction" "Stang". Certainly there is no destruction of property or infrastructure with the use of deadly gases however mass fatal casualties do at least in my mind qualify. I think we might be into semantics "Stang"?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

American

Sep-08-13 7:17 PM

Where did judeye and her GMO rant go. Maybe they used the GMO as chemical weapons and got her.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

IAMBill

Sep-08-13 7:12 PM

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House asserted Sunday that a "common-sense test" dictates the Syrian government is responsible for a chemical weapons attack that President Barack Obama says demands a U.S. military response. But Obama's top aide says the administration lacks "irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence" that skeptical Americans, including lawmakers who will start voting on military action this week, are seeking." So they have no proof only "obamas" common sense saying so. Well that explains the need to send our troops in doesn't it. The man is a joke.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Sep-08-13 6:23 PM

That is the question, isn't it? WHO used the gas...and when? Niether "side" in this conflict likes America. Why arm, help, or do anything for either side? Apparently the international community wants America to once again put her wealth and might to use...why? Let the other SOB's that consistently call us a bunch of cowboys or imperialistic oppressers use some of their wealth and military might to step on this bug. I am very confident that America will end up doing something here, and still of the opinion we should not. Why am I so confident? Obama is nothing if not cosistent, everything he has done so far has weakened America. This just might be the tipping point for the end of her. Barry is frothing at the bit to rip this country to shreds...he sees his best chance for it right here. And afterweards, he can claim for history, I asked and recieved Congresses blessing....It wasn't ME that destroyed America.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Sep-08-13 5:55 PM

Are you sure Assad used the weapons and not the rebels? Those rebels, Islamic Radicals, have used their own children to kill their enemies. They’ve blown up cafes and busses with their own people on them in order to kill a couple of their enemies. They have possession of chemical weapons. Do you really believe they wouldn’t gas their own people if it meant bringing other nations into the civil war to against Assad? Assad knew the use of these weapons could bring the US into the conflict and he’s not that stupid. He knows US Airpower could strike his facilities with impunity.

BTW, chemical and biological weapons aren’t Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Chemical and biological weapons destroy nothing. Matter-of-fact, rain can neutralize the effectiveness of a chemical weapon. Nuclear weapons destroy everything and are therefore classified as WMD’s.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Sep-08-13 10:35 AM

Bob what is it you propose to insure that Assad can not do a curtain call? The President should have taken swift action when it first happened. With all the posturing going on I'm surprised we haven't faxed the battle plan to Assad! When Reagan nailed Libya in 1986 I can tell you he didn't ring the doorbell before going in!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Sep-08-13 10:32 AM

Bob what is it you propose to insure that Assad can not do a curtain call? The President should have taken swift action when it first happened. With all the posturing going on I'm surprised we haven't faxed the battle plan to Assad! When Reagan nailed Libya in 1986 I can tell you he didn't ring the doorbell before going in!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bob1957

Sep-08-13 9:35 AM

Is Neville Chamberlin alive and well and we didn't know? Peace in our time! If we fail to act with or without international support and we have France and Australia formally willing to provide military support, then what have we learned not one*****thing. What will God say to each of us, if we fail to act to respond to such and act by Assad. We(as citizens of this planet)are accountable to protect all people from WMD. The UN report will be out, the initial response has been positive to the use of sarin gas. We are accountable each and every one of us if we fail to stop further use of chemical attacks. The you tube vid cuts show without questions the use wmd.The last word for me on this is if we fail to act then Assad has a green light to continue, as the entire world watches and Iran and Russia approve. My God, My God!

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Sep-08-13 9:07 AM

Judeye, that was pretty neat how you did that. We're talking about Syria and you were able to change the subject to GMO's.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

American

Sep-06-13 11:53 PM

"Many fear that right now with the use of GMO in much of our food. At least label the foods so we can choose if we want to serve our families GMOs or not." What does this have to do with an article on Syria? Or that we should stay out of it and let them kill each other off. We are not wanted there, neither side is a friend of America so let the Arab Nation sort it out.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Sep-06-13 2:59 PM

I thought Judeye would not respond to my comments and post since she has no clue whatsoever as to what she was even saying.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Sep-06-13 10:20 AM

didnt an iraqi general say that the stores of chemical weapons were moved from Iraq to Syria ? We did not find huge stores of them during the iraq war. Assad is a piker to Saddam hussein and now Obama wants to strike ? the libs just want to blame repubs if something goes wrong, saying you voted for it.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Sep-06-13 9:46 AM

judeye is one confused lib. She wants GMO labels on food for choice. How about choice in schools judeye ? We only get the public one. How about vouchers ? First you say congress, the repubs obstruct, then you say McCain is asking for more ? Gracious, why dont you just outlaw the repubs and have only democrats ?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 64 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web