Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Syrian Civil War Discussion Thread; Share your thoughts!
Topic Started: Aug 30 2013, 10:37 PM (836 Views)
diggerjohn111
Member Avatar
Frozen Wasteland Pedestrian, Official Server Old Guy & Bruce Springsteen Impersonator
I think the biggest problem in the way people view this situation is that they view it myopically, thinking only of Afghanistan and Iraq. Look at Bosnia and Kosovo - limited engagements that WORKED, it forced Milosevic to the negotiations table and brought an end to the Yugoslav Civil War, and even lead to the liberation of Serbia herself. This monster in Damascus used CHEMICAL WEAPONS on his own people, think about that...the most indiscriminate and dehumanizing weapons ever conceived of by man. And you want to ignore a century of laws preventing this? Which would give an okay to nations like Iran to add to their own stockpiles. I am not saying we should commit to all-out war because of this, but neither is anyone else. Take out the command and control of Assad's forces, which after two years of civil war would not take very long and force him to talk. If we sit on the sidelines, afraid of pissing off that posturing midget in the Kremlin, then any credibility the West has is thrown out the window.
Edited by diggerjohn111, Sep 4 2013, 10:20 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
diggerjohn111
Sep 4 2013, 10:13 AM
I think the biggest problem in the way people view this situation is that they view it myopically, thinking only of Afghanistan and Iraq. Look at Bosnia and Kosovo - limited engagements that WORKED, it forced Milosevic to the negotiations table and brought an end to the Yugoslav Civil War, and even lead to the liberation of Serbia herself. This monster in Damascus used CHEMICAL WEAPONS on his own people, think about that...the most indiscriminate and dehumanizing weapons ever conceived of by man. And you want to ignore a century of laws preventing this? Which would give an okay to nations like Iran to add to their own stockpiles. I am not saying we should commit to all-out war because of this, but neither is anyone else. Take out the command and control of Assad's forces, which after two years of civil war would not take very long and force him to talk. If we sit on the sidelines, afraid of pissing off that posturing midget in the Kremlin, then any credibility the West has is thrown out the window.
Here's a good question: Who takes over after Assad? Who are the rebels?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bonecanoe86
Member Avatar
Administrator and Diehard KingofdaHipHop Fanboy
I think at this point the main idea for intervention in Syria is for America to show the world that the chemical weapons ban means something and isn't just words on paper. This has practical implications because it will cause other countries to rethink using chemical weapons in the future if they know they are going to be punished for it.

As far as the rebels go, it is hard to tell. I fear that when all is said and done Islamists will most likely take charge of Syria, which is unfortunate, but also most likely inevitable. The only way to stop these kinds of people is to actually invade and occupy these countries, and there is absolutely no public will for that right now and probably won't be for some time, if ever, in America.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jakk Dion
Member Avatar
The Video Game Designer, Writer and Musical talent from the House of Sim
Just saw some of the news just now and apparently only 29% are for it and the rest were against it. So, it might change, but for now it looks like it won't happen.
Edited by Jakk Dion, Sep 4 2013, 03:08 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
I say nuke 'em.

I'm just plain tired of that entire region. Either they grow up or they get nuked. Their choice.

Hell I'm tired of the entire world... We keep acting like a bunch of idiots.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
UnitRico
Member Avatar
HAIL THE HORSE MASK
"So, Assad, I see your chemical weapons, and I'll raise you a nuclear one! Now eat shit, you pile of refuse."

Doesn't actually sound half bad.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
UnitRico
Sep 5 2013, 11:34 AM
"So, Assad, I see your chemical weapons, and I'll raise you a nuclear one! Now eat shit, you pile of refuse."

Doesn't actually sound half bad.
Indeed.

Does that mean you're advocating Nuclear Holocaust on an entire nation that has no way to respond in kind?

You are the single most evil, horrible person on this earth, the very empidemy of why I despise this world.

Please die, now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
UnitRico
Member Avatar
HAIL THE HORSE MASK
Well, I've got you covered on the dying part, and if you mean "now" as in "between now and, say, 60 to 70 years", then we're all set.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
Apparently Congress denied Obama. Discuss, inferior humans!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bonecanoe86
Member Avatar
Administrator and Diehard KingofdaHipHop Fanboy
Well, apparently we're going to try the Russian plan first. But in my opinion it doesn't matter if the Syrian government opens up about its chemical weapons and allows international teams to dispose of them--they've already used them. That's the equivalent of somebody killing somebody with a gun and thinking they're going to get away with murder if only they hand the murder weapon over willingly. We need to let future dictators know that the use of chemical weapons will not be tolerated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply