Syria conflict: 'Chemical attacks kill hundreds' - Page 35

Mittelwaechter · 09-01-13, 04:14 AM

More and more I believe, the US military is a Saudi tool these days - to kick Assad and Iran. "Pay the oil with military power and keep your worthless greenbacks".
And a cornered Obama runs a show right now, telling his will to act, but in need for the Congress legitimation to attack. "Sorry may oily Prince, I tried everything to follow your wishes, but I can't break my own laws, you know. But I can deliver more weapons, training and intelligence to withdraw Assad and his friends."

I see only one justified solution for Syria: according to the R2P (right to protect) rules, an international force with superior tech should enter Syria and install safe areas along the borders for the Syrian civilians. Expand these areas from the borders and destroy any resistance. No strategic important terrains, but a passive no fly zone over these areas.

No support for any fighting party in Syria, but the safe place for the pepole who choose to stay out of the conflict. That's the R2P spirit. Let Assad and the aggressors fight their dispute, but save the peaceful people. When done, ask the protected people, if they want to fight the remaining party (and let them do!) or if they want to accept the winner.

This should consequently be done in all the conflicts worldwide, to bring them to an end.

It would be possible, if there were no further interests of members of the international community concerning Syria - and no interests of war profiteers around the world.

Vince82 · 09-01-13, 04:19 AM

Obama wants Congress's okay for Syria strike:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posttv...fd5_video.html

09-01-13, 04:34 AM

Quote:

I see only one justified solution for Syria:

So your solution is full scale invasion fighting against all factions in the conflict.
Not bad, now you just need agreement from Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Israel and the Leb on setting up on their borders.

Skybird · 09-01-13, 05:26 AM

Okay, this is Fox News. Ignore it, its not my favourite station too.

Okay its Krauthammer, if you don't like him, ignore the name, because what he says is right on target. He does not even say what he thinks should be done in Syria. He only says how Obama makes look himself. And there is is absolutely right.

Quote:

"But the most astonishing thing is the lack of any emergency."

Mittelwaechter · 09-01-13, 05:42 AM

No full scale invasion of Syria, but a clear UN scripted conquest of rather small areas to create save zones for civilians. All civil war parties should agree with it, should they? There would be no fighting necessary, if they would support the safety of the people.

Turkey, Jordan and Israel should be no problem, and even Iraq would probably join the club. Lebanon would be difficult, but maybe the Russian harbour at Tartus could be a beachhead for a safe zone. I guess Tartus is Assad's playground right now and his forces could leave the area.

Edit: well, there are already safe areas on the other side of the borders in Turkey and Jordan. All people can decide, wheather they want to leave the battle grounds or not. The international community should stay out of Syria and stop all support for any party. Simply wait for the last man standing. Those who stay in the combat zones are on their own.

You have a war in your country? Move out of the way or fight.

@ skybird

First I thought one zombie interviews an other one.

But Krauthammer has a valid point.

Skybird · 09-01-13, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

No full scale invasion of Syria, but a clear UN scripted conquest of rather small areas to create save zones for civilians. All civil war parties should agree with it, should they? There would be no fighting necessary, if they would support the safety of the people.

There would be no fighting necessary if they would support the peace for the country. Thjey should agree with it, shouldn'T they?

Well, "should" is not "would".

The zones you envision would need solid protection. Else you end up like the Dutch at Srebrenica. Solid protection needs a robust mandate. A VERY robust mandate. You need huge and costly military resources and a whole lot of money. You need the UNSC speaking unisono for all that. You will not get that. You need to fight your way in, and then keep on fighting to hold your ground. Hezbollah and Iran are against negotiations, so is Assad, so is AQ, the radical militias, parts of the FSA. Even if the FSA would sympathise with your idea (which i doubt they do), you would still need to fight on two fronts against two different enemies at the same time, with the Lebanon soup cooking over any moment and spilling into Israel. A brawl everybody against everybody.

Don't want to attack you, but: stop dreaming. It's reality you are dealing with. And reality is no vegetarian, but a carnivore.

Vince82 · 09-01-13, 05:51 AM

Well being able to pause is better to not being able to.

President Obama is one of the few who has all the facts, congress will follow him after those facts are presented to them. He will get the green light from them to strike.

Immidiate action is not needed in Syria, because it's about condemning Syria's use of CW's. There is enough time to think things over, but within 2 weeks cruise missiles will hit the Assad regime.

kraznyi_oktjabr · 09-01-13, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

No full scale invasion of Syria, but a clear UN scripted conquest of rather small areas to create save zones for civilians. All civil war parties should agree with it, should they? There would be no fighting necessary, if they would support the safety of the people.

Turkey, Jordan and Israel should be no problem, and even Iraq would probably join the club. Lebanon would be difficult, but maybe the Russian harbour at Tartus could be a beachhead for a safe zone. I guess Tartus is Assad's playground right now and his forces could leave the area.

Problem here is that how participants of Syrian civil war can trust that this intervention would also stay in that safe zone? Why should al-Assad assume that USA, Saudi Arabia et al would not use it as pretext for full scale invasion?

Skybird · 09-01-13, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

@ skybird

First I thought one zombie interviews an other one.

But Krauthammer has a valid point.

Some start smoking Botox form their 30th birthday on these days...

The babyface starting the interview is evidence (if he even is 30).

Jimbuna · 09-01-13, 05:56 AM

Quote:

The Syrian government has said the country's army is ready for potential foreign attacks and "has its finger on the trigger".
Reports from Damascus say the Syrian military has been moving equipment to civilian areas, including near schools and mosques, in anticipation of possible US-led strikes.

Most brave of them but not totally unexpected I suppose.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23918025

Mittelwaechter · 09-01-13, 06:03 AM

Yeah! I edited my last posting. Should have some sleep now...

Skybird · 09-01-13, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Most brave of them but not totally unexpected I suppose.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23918025

Quote from that link:

"Reports from Damascus say the Syrian military has been moving equipment to civilian areas, including near schools and mosques, "

They want to provoke collateral losses. America will try to avoid them and thus will scratch plenty of targets off their list now. Making any already limited strike even more ineffective.

Wouldn'T be surprised if they start to move huge civilian crowds onto their airfields and imprison them there around the bunkers and aircraft. Saddam did install plenty of human shields in Kuwait.

u crank · 09-01-13, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead

We need to keep out, two of our enemies fighting each other, sad that innocents are dying, but we killed our fair share in Afgan and Iraq war. It will cost billions of dollars and solve nothing, cept whoever wins we'll be in conflict with. Millions are dying in Africa from war, so it's certainly a political ploy by Obama. War will come soon enough with the entire area, let's wait til then.

Exactly. At this moment it is contained within Syria's borders. Any military incursion by US/ Europe could see it spread. There are already enough regional players on both sides. Let's face it, this country will never be the same again. Within this civil war there is a Sunni-Shia proxy war that will only get worse and will eventually involve most countries in the region. There is no upside.

And as far as the use of CW, I guess what the West wants is for al-Assad to make this promise. "Okay I wont use any more chemical weapons. I'll just go back to killing civilians the regular way." I know that would make me feel a whole lot better.

Vince82 · 09-01-13, 06:39 AM

The threat of an attack alone makes things incovenient for Assad and also shows the world that he's a coward that doesn't care about his own people.

Packlife · 09-01-13, 07:30 AM

Obama is sneaky smart though he's playin chess. That whole "red line" comment was deliberately thought up, an it was more meant for Iran an N. Korea. If Assad wouldn't of used chemical weapons Obama considers it a check. But Assad used them so now Obama will bomb Assad some as a warning or however he wants to put it. But by actually doing the bombing it's his way of telling the Mullahs in Iran an that lil short guy in N. Korea "Go ahead an try me I tomahawked ya buddy Assad for gassing 1.400 ppl, you keep building those nukes an watch what I do". Make no mistake those two countries are watching what we do, an you might say well if Obama wouldn't of said "red line" he wouldn't have to prove a point to them. But if Obama just lets some nut job gas people without saying or doing anything, why would Iran or N. Korea worry about us doing anything about them building nukes. Hell we hit Iran w/ "severe" sanctions an they're not even doing anything, sure prices for stuff went up but hasn't changed much companies like BMW, Lexus, Samsung, Lg all of who aren't suppose to do business w/ Iran still do they just use a proxy buyer or something like that. The only thing American you will not find in Iran is Battlefield 3 since majority of it takes place in Iran haha. I'm not sure what's going to happen w/ N.Korea but I've got a good feeling we'll get into it w/ Iran over their nuclear program sooner or later.

09-01-13, 04:14 AM	#511
Mittelwaechter The Old Man Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,304 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	More and more I believe, the US military is a Saudi tool these days - to kick Assad and Iran. "Pay the oil with military power and keep your worthless greenbacks". And a cornered Obama runs a show right now, telling his will to act, but in need for the Congress legitimation to attack. "Sorry may oily Prince, I tried everything to follow your wishes, but I can't break my own laws, you know. But I can deliver more weapons, training and intelligence to withdraw Assad and his friends." I see only one justified solution for Syria: according to the R2P (right to protect) rules, an international force with superior tech should enter Syria and install safe areas along the borders for the Syrian civilians. Expand these areas from the borders and destroy any resistance. No strategic important terrains, but a passive no fly zone over these areas. No support for any fighting party in Syria, but the safe place for the pepole who choose to stay out of the conflict. That's the R2P spirit. Let Assad and the aggressors fight their dispute, but save the peaceful people. When done, ask the protected people, if they want to fight the remaining party (and let them do!) or if they want to accept the winner. This should consequently be done in all the conflicts worldwide, to bring them to an end. It would be possible, if there were no further interests of members of the international community concerning Syria - and no interests of war profiteers around the world. __________________ 10 happy wolves rear 90 blinded, ensnared sheep. 90 happy sheep banish the wolves. Arrest the 1% - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ6hg1oNeGE

09-01-13, 05:42 AM	#515
Mittelwaechter The Old Man Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,304 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	No full scale invasion of Syria, but a clear UN scripted conquest of rather small areas to create save zones for civilians. All civil war parties should agree with it, should they? There would be no fighting necessary, if they would support the safety of the people. Turkey, Jordan and Israel should be no problem, and even Iraq would probably join the club. Lebanon would be difficult, but maybe the Russian harbour at Tartus could be a beachhead for a safe zone. I guess Tartus is Assad's playground right now and his forces could leave the area. Edit: well, there are already safe areas on the other side of the borders in Turkey and Jordan. All people can decide, wheather they want to leave the battle grounds or not. The international community should stay out of Syria and stop all support for any party. Simply wait for the last man standing. Those who stay in the combat zones are on their own. You have a war in your country? Move out of the way or fight. @ skybird First I thought one zombie interviews an other one. But Krauthammer has a valid point. __________________ 10 happy wolves rear 90 blinded, ensnared sheep. 90 happy sheep banish the wolves. Arrest the 1% - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ6hg1oNeGE Last edited by Mittelwaechter; 09-01-13 at 06:01 AM.

09-01-13, 06:03 AM	#521
Mittelwaechter The Old Man Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,304 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	Yeah! I edited my last posting. Should have some sleep now... __________________ 10 happy wolves rear 90 blinded, ensnared sheep. 90 happy sheep banish the wolves. Arrest the 1% - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ6hg1oNeGE

09-01-13, 06:39 AM	#524
Vince82 Engineer Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 216 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	The threat of an attack alone makes things incovenient for Assad and also shows the world that he's a coward that doesn't care about his own people. Last edited by Vince82; 09-01-13 at 06:51 AM.

09-01-13, 04:19 AM	#512
Vince82 Engineer Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 216 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	Obama wants Congress's okay for Syria strike: http://www.washingtonpost.com/posttv...fd5_video.html

09-01-13, 05:51 AM	#517
Vince82 Engineer Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 216 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	Well being able to pause is better to not being able to. President Obama is one of the few who has all the facts, congress will follow him after those facts are presented to them. He will get the green light from them to strike. Immidiate action is not needed in Syria, because it's about condemning Syria's use of CW's. There is enough time to think things over, but within 2 weeks cruise missiles will hit the Assad regime.

09-01-13, 07:30 AM	#525
Packlife Gunner Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 91 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	Obama is sneaky smart though he's playin chess. That whole "red line" comment was deliberately thought up, an it was more meant for Iran an N. Korea. If Assad wouldn't of used chemical weapons Obama considers it a check. But Assad used them so now Obama will bomb Assad some as a warning or however he wants to put it. But by actually doing the bombing it's his way of telling the Mullahs in Iran an that lil short guy in N. Korea "Go ahead an try me I tomahawked ya buddy Assad for gassing 1.400 ppl, you keep building those nukes an watch what I do". Make no mistake those two countries are watching what we do, an you might say well if Obama wouldn't of said "red line" he wouldn't have to prove a point to them. But if Obama just lets some nut job gas people without saying or doing anything, why would Iran or N. Korea worry about us doing anything about them building nukes. Hell we hit Iran w/ "severe" sanctions an they're not even doing anything, sure prices for stuff went up but hasn't changed much companies like BMW, Lexus, Samsung, Lg all of who aren't suppose to do business w/ Iran still do they just use a proxy buyer or something like that. The only thing American you will not find in Iran is Battlefield 3 since majority of it takes place in Iran haha. I'm not sure what's going to happen w/ N.Korea but I've got a good feeling we'll get into it w/ Iran over their nuclear program sooner or later.