• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Aid to Syria

ss1992 said:
And you're acting like WW3 couldn't get started from this.

If Iran, Syria, China, and Russia go against us.. You know Israel, Australia, and obviously the US will fight. Perhaps even France and Britain would join in on the US side. I think that would be considered a world war don't you think?
Click to expand...

Israel has managed to hit Syria several times without armageddon breaking out...
Israel Airstrike Targeted Advanced Missiles That Russia Sold to Syria, U.S. Says - NYTimes.com
 
ss1992 said:
Putin openly threatened us at the G20 summit
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I'd call putting forward the idea of Syria surrendering their chemical weapons a threat, exactly ;)

The Russians and Chinese have their own agenda. Syria is a good customer of both. More importantly, it's one of the few remaining allies Russia has in a strategically important region of the world: the Russians spent the last three years watching one ally after another get taken down across the region, they're not about to let the last and strongest go down without a fight.

Fortunately, they've chosen to fight via diplomacy .. for now.
 
ss1992 said:
I think the issue is the fact that we don't know who is AQ and who isn't.
Click to expand...
You don't, but don't speak for everyone.

ss1992 said:
Why does the US always feel like they have to barge right in?

Isn't this what the UN is for?
Click to expand...
Because Europe does not have the capabilities, the will, or the numbers. The UK being forced to pull out didn't help.

Gmash said:
Get ready for a lecture about "The Liberal Media" yadda yadda. Like Obama's opponents would really not be screaming from the rooftops if there was a shred of truth to that story. Hell, they won't even shut up about that fake Bengazi "scandal" yet.
Click to expand...
Don't you get it???? Those flower loving climate change pushers love war!!!!11

ss1992 said:
And you're acting like WW3 couldn't get started from this.
Click to expand...
Look, WW3 could be started by Herman Van Rumpoy knocking down a Russian pedestrian in his car.

Did Korea start WW3? Did Vietnam? Did Angola? Did Afghanistan? No.

Stop being so excitable, educate yourself and read up on your history. The world isn't black and white.

ss1992 said:
If Iran, Syria, China, and Russia go against us.. You know Israel, Australia, and obviously the US will fight. Perhaps even France and Britain would join in on the US side. I think that would be considered a world war don't you think?
Click to expand...

What does Australia have to do with anything? This is rambling nonsense, I'm sorry, but it's na
 
ElasticNinja said:
You don't, but don't speak for everyone.


Because Europe does not have the capabilities, the will, or the numbers. The UK being forced to pull out didn't help.

Don't you get it???? Those flower loving climate change pushers love war!!!!11


Look, WW3 could be started by Herman Van Rumpoy knocking down a Russian pedestrian in his car.

Did Korea start WW3? Did Vietnam? Did Angola? Did Afghanistan? No.

Stop being so excitable, educate yourself and read up on your history. The world isn't black and white.



What does Australia have to do with anything? This is rambling nonsense, I'm sorry, but it's na
Click to expand...
 
ss1992 said:
Australia is our ally? They fight along side us when we need help? Derpeder?
Click to expand...

Like most countries, their presence pretty nominal and largely to provide political support rather than military. That's not to say they're not putting their people in harms way - I believe nearly 300 were killed or wounded in Afghanistan - it's just that the number of people and the effectiveness of their equipment is pretty inconsequential compared to what the US has in theatre.
 
SiempreTuna said:
Like most countries, their presence pretty nominal and largely to provide political support rather than military. That's not to say they're not putting their people in harms way - I believe nearly 300 were killed or wounded in Afghanistan - it's just that the number of people and the effectiveness of their equipment is pretty inconsequential compared to what the US has in theatre.
Click to expand...

But still to say that that statement was nonsense is just flat out incorrect. Any country getting involved in war is a huge ordeal. And if we bomb Syria there will be a conflict much larger than just America and Syria. It would most likely cause a world war.
 
ss1992 said:
But still to say that that statement was nonsense is just flat out incorrect. Any country getting involved in war is a huge ordeal. And if we bomb Syria there will be a conflict much larger than just America and Syria. It would most likely cause a world war.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that worrying about things spiralling out of control and perhaps ultimately ending up in a world war is nonsense, but I do think the possibility is extremely remote.

Unlike with previous world wars (including those prior to the two in the 20th century), I just don't there's an appetite among the big powers - the US, Europe, China, maybe Russia - for a big war. I'm sure there are some elements - like the extremists in Iran and NORK - who might be up for it, but they simply don't pose the sort of existential threat to any major power that would generate the required reaction.

At least, not any more. Even the Bush / Cheney crowd are nowhere near so gung ho anymore - getting your ass kicked in two wars does that to a country.
 
SiempreTuna said:
I don't believe that worrying about things spiralling out of control and perhaps ultimately ending up in a world war is nonsense, but I do think the possibility is extremely remote.

Unlike with previous world wars (including those prior to the two in the 20th century), I just don't there's an appetite among the big powers - the US, Europe, China, maybe Russia - for a big war. I'm sure there are some elements - like the extremists in Iran and NORK - who might be up for it, but they simply don't pose the sort of existential threat to any major power that would generate the required reaction.

At least, not any more. Even the Bush / Cheney crowd are nowhere near so gung ho anymore - getting your ass kicked in two wars does that to a country.
Click to expand...

Not worried about it, just staying watchful. No sense in putting your hand in the sand you know?

With Iran progressing in its nuclear program I think the thought of them being a somewhat big threat grows more and more. Just my 2
 
ss1992 said:
Not worried about it, just staying watchful. No sense in putting your hand in the sand you know?

With Iran progressing in its nuclear program I think the thought of them being a somewhat big threat grows more and more. Just my 2
Click to expand...
 
Gmash said:
Hopefully this deal for Syria to give up their chemical weapons works out and it will be a win-win for everybody.
Click to expand...
Except for the Syrian rebels of course. Conventional weapons kill just as easily as chemical ones. Chemical weapons have a bit more flash and are obviously more horrific...but in the end you are still dead either way. Even if a deal is reached, all it will do is let the US and other parties save face. The war will continue in Syria. The end result will be an entire generation of uneducated and screwed up kids. Ripe pickings for organizations like Al Qaeda ten years down the road. The cycle of violence will continue.
 
JohnLaird said:
"... Conventional weapons kill just as easily as chemical ones. ..."

"... Ripe pickings for organizations like Al Qaeda ten years down the road. The cycle of violence will continue.
Click to expand...

The US supplied weapons to Al Qaeda which was judged a great success at the time.

CIA begins weapons delivery to Syrian rebels - The Washington Post

"The CIA has begun delivering weapons to rebels in Syria, ending months of delay in lethal aid that had been promised by the Obama administration, according to U.S. officials and Syrian figures. The shipments began streaming into the country over the past two weeks, along with separate deliveries by the State Department of vehicles and other gear
 
OutofDate1980 said:
The US supplied weapons to Al Qaeda which was judged a great success at the time.

CIA begins weapons delivery to Syrian rebels - The Washington Post

"The CIA has begun delivering weapons to rebels in Syria, ending months of delay in lethal aid that had been promised by the Obama administration, according to U.S. officials and Syrian figures. The shipments began streaming into the country over the past two weeks, along with separate deliveries by the State Department of vehicles and other gear
Click to expand...
 
Gmash said:
That's the reason it is important for America (not just Obama) to keep its credibility. You can't just make a threat and then not back it up. Iran is watching and it is only a matter of time before we seriously butt heads over their nuclear program. Hopefully this deal for Syria to give up their chemical weapons works out and it will be a win-win for everybody.
Click to expand...

Iran's new President seems to be open to negotiations. Hopefully we can all compromise. I don't see an attack on Iran happening now.

OutofDate1980 said:
The US supplied weapons to Al Qaeda which was judged a great success at the time.

CIA begins weapons delivery to Syrian rebels - The Washington Post

"The CIA has begun delivering weapons to rebels in Syria, ending months of delay in lethal aid that had been promised by the Obama administration, according to U.S. officials and Syrian figures. The shipments began streaming into the country over the past two weeks, along with separate deliveries by the State Department of vehicles and other gear
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom