Cold War II: The Donald warns Russia of missile strike in Syria

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Catfish

I still wonder.. if it is so obvious that one man like Assad is responsible for violating international law and using 'forbidden' weapons, why kill his people and ruin the country and infrastructure for decades to come, instead of him? If those weapons and spooks are that smart...

first, you are assuming a man like Assad is easy to find. If he was, he would have been assassinated a long time ago. No doubt he is constantly on the move, SOP for dictators.

second, removing Assad will not necessarily solve the issue. The Assads are an extended clan, brothers, cousins and other relatives control the government. Remove one and another one will take over, who may be worse...

third, the Assads are part of the Alawite clans, around 2,000,000 strong, which have key position and know that if the Assads fall from power, all 2,000,000 men, women and children will most likely be killed and/or stripped of all their assets and/or tossed out as refugees, so even if Assad is killed, they will support his replacement since the alternative is unthinkable.

this is a very complex situation. Western politicians are always looking for the quick fix or the popular slogan, but there is no easy answer.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

this is a very complex situation. Western politicians are always looking for the quick fix or the popular slogan, but there is no easy answer.

The easy fix is for western countries to not get involved in these internal conflicts.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Dowly

The easy fix is for western countries to not get involved in these internal conflicts.

agreed, for once, you actually make sense...

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

agreed, for once, you actually make sense...

Like a broken clock, I too have my moments.

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Dowly

The easy fix is for western countries to not get involved in these internal conflicts.

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

agreed, for once, you actually make sense...

Originally Posted by Dowly

Like a broken clock, I too have my moments.

Dowly proves shorter answers are better, but still I miss vienna's long rhetoric's I hope he's not sick

Now that there is a pause in the response to the chemical warfare used on innocent people in Syria (blink)
I hope it wasn't from the threat of Russian doubling down on the promise to punish anyone that strikes back at Syria.

This could set a red line in other do not touch or we will touch back in future conflicts of this nature.

One more note has Syria been involved in any cyber warfare in the past?
If so could they, with the help of the more intelligent Russian allies, strike back with cyber warfare?

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

Dowly proves shorter answers are better, but still I miss vienna's long rhetoric's I hope he's not sick

I do miss Vienna's posts, well sourced and comprehensive.

As for my posts, well, I only go the extra mile if I know it might make a difference. Myself and others have been saying for years that supporting the so-called terrorists rebels is not a good idea.

[mapuc]

I think we all remember Obama drawing his red line.

And nothing happened after Assad had used chemical weapons or was accused of have used chemical weapons.

I thought

WHAT what about this red line Assad has crossed it and Obama does nothing-Guess it was someone called a salut speech(skål tale in Danish)

Some days ago I came to the conclusion why he didn't act as he had said he would.

He have been told by his security-ting-people

In the war against ISIS it would not be so good to weaken the Syrian army now that ISIS is strong.
(of course I could be totally wrong)

Today ISIS is almost gone.

Markus

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Dowly

The easy fix is for western countries to not get involved in these internal conflicts.

Meine Rede!