War with Syria

[Gravitymaster 0]

jclalor

Quote

***

Again, we are not sure which side used them

Who is "we"? You and GM?... LOL.

Please present us with some proof other than "Obama said so".

[normiss 622]

The long faced Kerry dude said they have released unprecedented amounts of classified information to the public so we know exactly what's going on.
Did you miss all that info?












yeah....I did too.

[Gravitymaster 0]

What some can't seem to get is that it may very well be true that Assad used CM's. But this time I think we all should agree that we need to be 100% positive.

Even if it turns out Assad was responsible, we need to make sure we are doing the right thing. I don't envy Obama, this is a very tough call. Making hollow threats is not a good strategy.

[quade 3]

Gravitymaster

What some can't seem to get is that it may very well be true that Assad used CM's. But this time I think we all should agree that we need to be 100% positive.

Even if it turns out Assad was responsible, we need to make sure we are doing the right thing. I don't envy Obama, this is a very tough call. Making hollow threats is not a good strategy.

Well, you finally seem to be coming around.

That said, if Aasad was known to use the chemical weapons previously with a 99% accuracy and this requires a 100% accuracy in order to get all the ducks in a row to take some action on it AND we've done that . . . then was it a "hollow threat"?

I assume you've already read it, but for those who haven't this is the de-classified report.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/30/government-assessment-syrian-government-s-use-chemical-weapons-august-21

One can only assume there is far more you and I will not see for some time. It will be interesting to eventually find out, if we ever do, precisely what is said to Putin.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Channman 2]

billvon

>To direct bombings and or drones on Obama might be considered illegal

Probably, there's that law against assassinating the President.

>and quite possible interrupt his gulf game.

I think of Syria as more Middle Eastern than Gulf.

Touché

[Gravitymaster 0]

So, Obama is just as certain as Bush was.

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm

[normiss 622]

"High confidence"
"We assess that the opposition has not used chemical weapons."
"may have contributed"
"signs consistent with, but not unique to, nerve agent exposure."


Sounds very ummm convincing.



Let's get to killing!

[quade 3]

Gravitymaster

So, Obama is just as certain as Bush was.
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm

And . . . when it was PROVEN it was bullshit, he ruined the US reputation around the globe.

Do you not think that maybe Obama knows this and is completely aware of the ramifications of being proven wrong?

I want you to also consider this thing that just happened.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/04/russians-send-official-request-to-meet-with-u-s-congress/

Now, you, me, and just about everybody on the planet knows Boehner generally is a pretty big obstructionist. At pretty much every turn he's obstructed even the most benign things the Obama Administration has attempted to do and it's no secret it's all to score political points. We all get that. It's simply the way things are done now.

So, think of the political points Boehner just gave up. Why? Ask yourself if Boehner has maybe seen something you and I haven't that goes far beyond the left vs right politics we've seen in the last five years. What would make him do that?

I dunno, but hopefully it's for the right cause.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[normiss 622]

After the last few excursions, it's very very difficult to have that faith this time.

[quade 3]

normiss

After the last few excursions, it's very very difficult to have that faith this time.

Understandable! I'm not in disagreement. I'm equally certain the President is well aware of it.

That said, our capabilities today to determine this sort of thing are several magnitudes greater than during the beginning of the last "adventure."

As I said upthread, you and I will probably never know the full amount of evidence. It's going to remain classified for quite some time. Maybe past our lifetimes.

That said, it seems as if whenever the evidence is shown to those who do have access, they drop their objections. To me it says a lot Boehner completely changed his normal, political, strictly partizan way of doing things. To me, that indicates there's something there pretty convincing.

As I also said upthread, Putin has softened his position just in the last day or so and it will be very interesting to see his reaction when the UN testing is complete. That's probably not for another week (just a guess on my part).

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Gravitymaster 0]

Why do you suppose most other countries aren't signing up? Would you support the US going it alone? What possible difference could firing off a few dozen cruise missiles have? The won't cause Assad to leave office. If anything, it will strength his resolve.

But let's suppose I'm wrong and Assad leaves office or is killed. Do you thing the next government would be any better?

[quade 3]

Gravitymaster

Why do you suppose most other countries aren't signing up?

I KNOW you're not going to like it, but I am 100% convinced it's because of the previous Administration. And rightly so.

Quote

Would you support the US going it alone?

Look back at my first response I made in this thread. Go ahead. I'll wait. I stand behind every post I've made on the subject. I never suggested the US WILL go alone. I have frequently said that IF we do something, it will NOT be alone.

Quote

But let's suppose I'm wrong and Assad leaves office or is killed. Do you thing the next government would be any better?

It's not about regime change. It's about the civilized world saying the use of NBC weapons is intolerable. If there is a "next guy" he'll understand what actions took place that killed off the "old guy."

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Gravitymaster 0]

We don't have the money to pay for an actual invasion. Maybe we could get the Saudi's to pay for it. You know, like we were told Iraqi oil would pay for that one.

[normiss 622]

Very valid points to consider Paul.

[Gravitymaster 0]

I've also read that it would take about 75,00 ground troops to get Syrias CW's. Are you willing to commit that many Americans? Doesn't seem to make any sense to initiate any type of action unless the end result is that Assad no longer has CW's available.

[normiss 622]

Stop making up fantasies.
You're not helping your argument in any way with this sort of silliness.

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

That said, our capabilities today to determine this sort of thing are several magnitudes greater than during the beginning of the last "adventure."

As I said upthread, you and I will probably never know the full amount of evidence. It's going to remain classified for quite some time. Maybe past our lifetimes.

We've gotten 100x or 1000x (what is several?) better at detecting this in just the past 10 years? That's amazing!! Or a dramatic exaggeration.

And why would this evidence need to remain classified? If we have such awesome detection capability, better to make it known to all, like any Doomsday device. Does you no good if no one knows it exists.

[Gravitymaster 0]

normiss

Stop making up fantasies.
You're not helping your argument in any way with this sort of silliness.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2411885/Revealed-Pentagon-knew-2012-75-000-GROUND-TROOPS-secure-Syrias-chemical-weapons-facilities.html

[normiss 622]

NOW I believe you!

OK - we need to invade now.

[quade 3]

Gravitymaster

I've also read that it would take about 75,00 ground troops to get Syrias CW's. Are you willing to commit that many Americans? Doesn't seem to make any sense to initiate any type of action unless the end result is that Assad no longer has CW's available.

That is the Kobayashi Maru part of this. There simply is no "good" answer there, but since we've (both the President and now the Senate) have already taken "boots on the ground" and "capturing" the weapons off the table, I think we need to make the message loud and clear that whoever is in control of them would do best to not screw with them.

It's a calculation. Do we outright kill Aasad and let some rebels take his place? Probably not. Do we cripple some of Aasad's infrastructure to make firing the rockets more difficult? Well, that's probably not a horrible option all things considered and clearly neither you nor I have access to all the options to be considered to begin with.

Look, the Pentagon, regardless of the general distrust whipped up by any one of a number of AM talking heads, really does know what the F it's doing when it comes to laying out a plan to bomb the fuck out of things. It's like . . . the ONE thing they do really well. My guess is they didn't spend Labor Day weekend on the internet theoretically bitching about it. They probably flew satellites, drones, had humans risking their lives taking cell phone photos and they're going to continue to work up the best solution possible right up to the second the order is given.

I'm sure as hell not going to second guess THAT part of it.

My only concern is the proof of crimes against humanity on things we might know about in the recent past, so we don't repeat the utter failures of our own still too recent past. Speculation about distant future hypotheticals, while fun for us and part of strategic thinking that should take place by our leaders is just out of the hands of people like you and me.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

kelpdiver

We've gotten 100x or 1000x (what is several?) better at detecting this in just the past 10 years? That's amazing!! Or a dramatic exaggeration.

How much human intelligence did we have in Afghanistan and Iraq prior to 9/11? If you said zero, you're probably pretty close.

How many spy drones did we have?

How much telecommunications interception capability did we have?

Dramatic, yes. Exaggeration, I don't think so.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Gravitymaster 0]

Sorry, but I don't think bombs will prevent Assad from using CW's if he feels threatened with loss of power and perhaps his life. The only thing that will stop him is either to kill him, which we both agree would not be ideal as we would be turning the country over to the AQ backed rebels, or to remove the CW's so he no longer has them. Come on Quade, you are the one always pontificating that the only way to prevent gun crime is to ban guns. Why can't you use that same logic here? Heck, I'll even agree the only way to prevent criminals from using a weapon is to take it away from them.

Third option would be a complete isolation with U.N sanctions. Nothing goes in, nothing goes out.

[normiss 622]

I cannot for the life of me, forget that the US government not only sold CW's to Iraq, but that we KNOWING they would use them on the Iranians, actually called them on the phone with military intelligence to provide them the location to gas the Iranians.
Oh, then we sat quietly on the sidelines when they used them on their own.
Bush, then, sounded like Obama sounds now.

We will contribute to empowering Iran if we smack Syria.
IMO, this will cause more imbalance in the region than our previous efforts have.

Maybe we will find a way to get those damn pipelines yet.
Time will tell I suppose.

[Stumpy 256]

I think we have said this before, but its best not to use the Mail as a source - you might as well use Fox/MSNBC for all the factual accuracy it contains.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[Gravitymaster 0]

Note the date.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/02/romneys-plan-could-put-75000-troops-syria/49091/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11791449