Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Romney on Syria


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 beach

beach

    |~~~~|

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,505 posts

Posted 08 October 2012 - 09:51 PM

http://www.boston.co...6nqO/story.html

http://www.guardian....m-syrian-rebels

Discuss

What should our involvement be, if any at all in your opinion?

This may be asking a lot but let's keep the ever so cute one-liners to a minimum if possible

#2 ARSEN

ARSEN

    Banned

  • ALL-PRO
  • 11,857 posts

Posted 08 October 2012 - 10:09 PM

Thing you do in this situation...

You see Turks and Arabs are on a verge of attacking Syria while Iran backing Syria. You encourage Turks and Arabs to push on Syria and Iran and then slowly back away. This will start internal conflict between Muslims... you just sit back and watch.


You start war with Syria, muslims will see US as a bully again and will unite against US. Right now Hamas and Hezbollah are on a verge of a war... why the fug would anyone intervene between 2 terrorist organizations that about to destroy each other? If we truly fighting terrorism in middle east, that's the time to just sit back and watch.

#3 BBQ&Beer

BBQ&Beer

    The good actor

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,965 posts
  • LocationMissouri

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:32 AM

Thing you do in this situation...

You see Turks and Arabs are on a verge of attacking Syria while Iran backing Syria. You encourage Turks and Arabs to push on Syria and Iran and then slowly back away. This will start internal conflict between Muslims... you just sit back and watch.


You start war with Syria, muslims will see US as a bully again and will united against US. Right now Hamas and Hezbollah are on a verge of a war... why the fug would anyone intervene between 2 terrorist organizations that about to destroy each other? If we truly fighting terrorism in middle east, that's the time to just sit back and watch.


SHHHHHHHH!!!!!!


(Dude! Don't suggest things that make sense! You'll jinx it!)

#4 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,046 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 10:14 AM

Provide some support to the rebels, and offer to recognize them immediately should they take control of the government. Maybe we should provide arms, but I would need a lot more information about the rebels before making a decision on that.

#5 The Saltman

The Saltman

    I am always watching so make sure you keep your clothes on

  • Moderators
  • 24,959 posts
  • LocationAtlanta,GA

Posted 09 October 2012 - 10:16 AM

same. i wouldnt go to war in that country regardless of the atrocities happening.

if we did we should also go to africa where most of that continent is a wasteland of genocide.

#6 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,895 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 10:25 AM

Think Romney suggested supplying arms through Saudis, not directly.

Probably a good idea.

#7 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:08 AM

Think Romney suggested supplying arms through Saudis, not directly.

Probably a good idea.


If you announce to the world that you will, ‘‘ensure they obtain the arms they need to defeat Assad’s tanks, helicopters and fighter jets" then I dont think giving the arms directly or indirectly makes any difference

#8 Tarheel31

Tarheel31

    cynical pessimist

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 645 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:44 AM

How about think to yourself "Hmm, that sucks for Syria."

Then you bring home the troops, cut the bloated defense budget and spend the tax money on infrastructure and education.

n/m, that's crazy.

#9 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,374 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 02:30 PM

I am not inclined to support an imperialistic doctrine. However, I was given pause to consider the observations by the early W Bush cabinet that we cannot abide a nation state that sponsors terrorism against US citizens. If we have proof of that, we are well within our rights to defend ourselves.

On the other hand, to adopt a policy of forwarding nations' revolutions to suit our own economical and political interests is inherently antithetical to the founders' mandates for the federal government. I believe their wisdom on the matter to be as prudent now as it was then.

#10 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,046 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 02:52 PM

Would these be the same founders that accepted military assistance that France sent? The purpose of that assistance was to weaken the British empire and further french political and economic interest. If that actually was a belief or purpose of the founders, then it was extremely hypocritical of them.

Not that I buy that all the founders were of a single mind concerning various beliefs and goals that are attributed to them nowadays.

#11 bredy087

bredy087

    The Comeback Kid

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,002 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 06:02 PM

I'm really interested to see Turkeys next move. Do they secure areas across the Syrian border to create a buffer zone against arty/fire that has been crossing the border. I wonder??? As Turkey goes so goes NATO.

#12 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,046 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 07:35 PM

I'm really interested to see Turkeys next move. Do they secure areas across the Syrian border to create a buffer zone against arty/fire that has been crossing the border. I wonder??? As Turkey goes so goes NATO.

If the attacks continue to spill over into Turkey, NATO would be within its rights to respond per the terms of the treaty. They wouldn't need UN Security council approval. But I do think that any response by Turkey with or without NATO, will likely be limited to the buffer zone you mentioned, or airstrikes on Syrian positions near the border, or some combination thereof.

#13 SOJA

SOJA

    Official Panthers Fan

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,897 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 08:07 PM

not jack poo, let them figure their own problems out

#14 PhillyB

PhillyB

    that jungle football

  • ALL-PRO
  • 20,536 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 10 October 2012 - 04:51 PM

those brownies are getting pretty feisty, better amp up military spending to keep us safe

#15 bredy087

bredy087

    The Comeback Kid

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,002 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 05:06 PM

The presence of some 150 Americans at the King Abdullah II Special Operations Training Center northeast of the capital is a clear message to Assad that Jordan's longtime Western allies stand ready to defend the country if it is dragged into the 19-month Syria conflict.

http://www.huffingto...1/ml-jordan-us/


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com