Let's have a vote: Should the West intervene in Syria?

[Gucumatz]

Ah excuse me then, I fall in the basket slightly above you (I believe we can act with fairly pinpoint precision with next to nothing lost [well a few millions in missiles that we spend regularly anyways...])

Either way - I think we won't act so these multiple threads are becoming a little redundant and perhaps not needed on that note. So perhaps I should start a poll myself asking CFC what they think will happen

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

Ah excuse me then, I fall in the basket slightly above you (I believe we can act with fairly pinpoint precision with next to nothing lost [well a few millions in missiles that we spend regularly anyways...])

Either way - I think we won't act so these multiple threads are becoming a little redundant and perhaps not needed on that note. So perhaps I should start a poll myself asking CFC what they think will happen

Well we got four threads right? Might as well go for five.

 

[Chiteng]

\



Would we lose credibility on our threats if we acted rather than not acted?


So?


Well the rebels are in trouble right now.

My credibility would not be affected in any way. I didnt tell Assad to be afraid.
It is OBAMA that would lose credibility, and he, I dont give a damn about.
He is an idiot. An idiot with Nuclear weapons.

And who elected that fool? Not me man, not me.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

My credibility would not be affected in any way. I didnt tell Assad to be afraid.
It is OBAMA that would lose credibility, and he, I dont give a damn about.
He is an idiot. An idiot with Nuclear weapons.

And who elected that fool? Not me man, not me.

Obama told Assad to not use chemical weapons, and likely any other president with a reasonable chance of being elected would have too.

Not just Obama would just credibility, the US would.

A nation is its people and their actions. People in this world are quite to judge and the US is not so erratic in its foreign policy that the message sent by letting Assad use WMDs willy nilly would go unheard.

 

[Peck of Arabia]

The US loses credibility? Going to war to "save face" sounds like something from the long nineteenth century.

Anyway, if I may speak as part the international community- I know to place praise or blame on individual administrations rather than "the US" as a whole and we're all very much aware when one administration ends and another begins. So a climb down may be a little humiliating for a couple of years (assuming you personally bear the blame for what your government does) then life will carry on as normal.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

The US loses credibility? Going to war to "save face" sounds like something from the long nineteenth century.

Going to war to save face has, is, and likely will continue to be fairly common.

If it seems like such a foreign concept, it's likely you're from a country that hasn't mattered for some years.

 

[kramerfan86]

Peck raises a fair point though, its well established that US foreign policy shifts with administrations, so the United States as a whole is relatively unharmed outside of Obama's remaining time in office. its not like the word of the next president is dictated by the word of the last.

 

[JoeM]

I don't see how bombing selected locations in Syria will help anything. If anything, I'm sure it will make matters worse.

Syria needs to be cut off from all arms shipments.

Assad thinks he can get away with using chemical weapons, a missile strike on the factories (if feasible) would stop the production of weapons and convince them that we're not pissing about. This could deter him from using chemical weapons again - which is the desired outcome.

 

[JoeM]

I voted no on military intervention.

However, if the West and Israel are so concerned about humanity, then send doctors, food and clothing for the refugees.

And stop supporting the armed opposition.

Sent via mobile.

Doctors, in fact anyone, would have to be insane to walk into a city being gassed.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Doctors, in fact anyone, would have to be insane to walk into a city being gassed.

The refugees aren't in cities being gassed. They are on are the borders and in Turkey, Jordan &al.

Sent via mobile.

 

[JoeM]

The refugees aren't in cities being gassed. They are on are the borders and in Turkey, Jordan &al.

Sent via mobile.

Conceded.

I misread your post.

 

[Defiant47]

Assad thinks he can get away with using chemical weapons, a missile strike on the factories (if feasible) would stop the production of weapons and convince them that we're not pissing about. This could deter him from using chemical weapons again - which is the desired outcome.

There's also the fact that we, as well as humanity as a whole, have so much to lose by not getting involved. Because not intervening would encourage other dictators to start using chemical weapons again.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

I vote we invade Canada for the unprovoked attack by Justin Bieber.

UK, you are next b/c of One Direction.

Sent via mobile.

 

[Defiant47]

I vote we invade Canada for the unprovoked attack by Justin Bieber.

UK, you are next b/c of One Direction.

Sent via mobile.

All of us need liberation from terrible pop music.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

All righty, then...
On our way...

Sent via mobile.

 

[Chiteng]

Obama told Assad to not use chemical weapons, and likely any other president with a reasonable chance of being elected would have too.

Not just Obama would just credibility, the US would.

A nation is its people and their actions. People in this world are quite to judge and the US is not so erratic in its foreign policy that the message sent by letting Assad use WMDs willy nilly would go unheard.

That is the problem right there, Admin that are more concerned with their ratings,
than with the good of the country. A president that was concerned about the COUNTRY,
would stop posturing, and work to remove the real threats.

 

[Luckymoose]

Assad is being wrongly accused by Islamists. I won't stand for America helping terrorists.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

That is the problem right there, Admin that are more concerned with their ratings,
than with the good of the country.

lolwut? Could you restate that in a way I can understand?

A president that was concerned about the COUNTRY,
would stop posturing, and work to remove the real threats.

And what "real" threats does the US face friend?

 

[Lord Baal]

Peck raises a fair point though, its well established that US foreign policy shifts with administrations, so the United States as a whole is relatively unharmed outside of Obama's remaining time in office. its not like the word of the next president is dictated by the word of the last.

Do you really think your average Arab living in the hell-hole that is large swathes of the Middle East and Central Asia, not to mention Indonesia, really understand that difference?

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

They used chemical weapons? Nuke 'em to show that it is really bad thing to do...

I wonder what is UN doing or what it has been doing for past year or two. The same for so called Arab league which was involved in taking down the Libyan dude...
Is possible UN sends in troops to protect population or what can it do at this point?