Syria?

[EmoMoose86]

Syria? Discuss

[WithStamin]

They're making some bad choices, but I don't think it will come down to war like it did with Iraq.

[therealhebm]

Axis of Evil Tour '03

My prediction is coming true...

[therealhebm]

In all seriousness this is prolly a lot of hot air. The President knows America is sick of war and his ass wont get reelected if he keeps in hard to justify wars all the time.

[The Nephilm]

he won't get re-elected unless he is at war. the second we aren't bombing a poor third world country or at least threatening to do so, his approval ratings are going to go back to what they were pre 9/11 and he will be fucked.

[EmoMoose86]

Originally posted by therealhebm
In all seriousness this is prolly a lot of hot air. The President knows America is sick of war and his ass wont get reelected if he keeps in hard to justify wars all the time.

actually- approval polls are at their highest.

[xTSTLx]

the more countries what we start to target the more venerable we become...this could turn out bad, real bad

[yeat182]

Originally posted by xTSTLx
the more countries what we start to target the more venerable we become...this could turn out bad, real bad

which is exactly why the arguement "well if we attack iraq, why don't we attack N. Korea? they're a bigger threat to us. or why don't we attack Saudi Arabia, they oppress their people." doesn't hold any water. We can't fight multiple wars all over the world at the same time, even we aren't that strong. we have to take it one situation at a time, and attempt to solve each one diplomatically first.

You know who should deal with Syria? the other arab countries in the region. It is everyone's best interests that the US does not invade Syria, because every arab country knows that they might be next on the list. Powell should make a trip to all the arab countries and say, "here, this is all the evidence we have. this is what syria has, this is what we want, these are the people hiding in syria, and they have to be caught. either we go in and get them or they give them up on their own." then the arab countries would be wise to say, "syria, give up everything they want, or you're next on the list, and we don't want to get involved in a war to protect you."

[evil zach]

Nobdy said we should go after iraq and north korea at the same time. But if they were gonna go after anybody it should have been north korea instead of Iraq.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by evil zach
Nobdy said we should go after iraq and north korea at the same time. But if they were gonna go after anybody it should have been north korea instead of Iraq.

i agree. but you have to remember, that we were already well into the crisis with Iraq when N. Korea announced they restarted their nuclear program, (which they did because they knew we were involved elsewhere). also, N. Korea poses a much different problem than Iraq did/does. You have to worry about both China and Russia, as well as South Korea and Japan, and what they feel should be done. Also, it is better to at least attempt a diplomatic solution, which they are still working on. the real shame is that the UN is now a joke and will have no power to tell N. Korea to do anything...

[EmoMoose86]

Originally posted by evil zach
Nobdy said we should go after iraq and north korea at the same time. But if they were gonna go after anybody it should have been north korea instead of Iraq.


I know this is a totally different context but..

When the United States entered WWII

they had two targets.

1. Europe w/ a threat that *could* spread to us- one that was killing people- an evil regime (sounds like Iraq gasp)

2. Japan- who was actually a bigger threat to us DIRECTLY because they were taking American islands and really hitting a little too close to home.

Where did we go first?

Europe

Europe to liberate, to free, to destroy an evil regime, and to help bring freedom to the people of Europe (again- sound oddly like Iraq?)

They knew that the fight would not be as hard in Europe. They knew it. And that was the correct strategic decision.

If we went for Japan- it would take years ( and it did ) - in those years- You never know what could happen in Europe could you?

Point being- Iraq was targeted before North Korea became a large threat with nuclear weapons. The boulder was rolling- no stopping hundreds of thousands of troops being poured into the middle east.
North Korea- we don't know whats going to happen. I hope we don't go to war... it will be a horrible war. I find it funny that anti-war people say "we should go to war with north korea! not iraq!" because.. thats not very anti-war is it? I don't want war. Clinton didn't- haha and he decided hey- I'll pay them to be good.. So Clinton did.
Hopfully the UN wont be pussies about North Korea. But I hope it does not lead to war.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by EmoMoose86
. I find it funny that anti-war people say "we should go to war with north korea! not iraq!" because.. thats not very anti-war is it?

HAHAHA. The problem with your arguement is that your thinking rationally, and thats one thing the protesters don't do.

good point.

[Ferrari333SP]

US is finally calling for Assad to step down:


http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/08/18/us.syria/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[maxvsmaradona]

Guys, this is really Syrias.

[Nuns On A Bus]

Quite the bump.

[knash9]

Wow 03. But its a good bump

[Ferrari333SP]

Is that a record for a bump?