Reply With QuoteAir strikes would easily be enough to decide this war.
I would love to see president Obama try and send troops into a chemical battlefield in an election year. The president is talking out of his ass....as usual.Originally Posted by Bloo
Air strikes would easily be enough to decide this war.
My exact thoughts when I heard this quote Bee.
Yeah right. The idea alone that there might be no military response by the west if chemical weapons are used is laughable.
The only reason why this statement by Obama can be regarded as purely political is because it was not necessary to mention it. The Syrians know it damn well anyway which is one of the reasons they will never use these weapons.
And I dont see how the Syrians could threaten US air power with chemical weapons.
Why does it have to be American air power? The United States has had barely any relations with Syria with maybe the exception of sending people to be tortured there in our rendition programs. We have no interests there, if Europe feels its important then I say go nuts Europe, bomb them bitches back to the stone age for all I care.
We're not coming along for the party this time.
Reports: Syria Issues Arrest Warrants for Lebanese Figures Accused of 'Backing Armed Groups'
Loji declined to mention any names but al-Manar quoted Syrian sources as saying that several Mustaqbal officials and MPs were involved, including ex-PM Saad Hariri and MPs Khaled al-Daher and Oqab Saqr.
http://m.naharnet.com/stories/en/506...g-armed-groups
Syrian regile response to Samaha arrest more ...
Looks to me, maybe, like a clear message to Assad: hey, do whatever you want, we know you wont use chemical weapons as then we will Tomahawk your @ss. What I mean is, maybe they don't want to take this ride and want to give him free hands to finish it. Then again, maybe they have info about possibility that Assad really uses them, maybe in Aleppo or somewhere else and want to warn him not to do so. Don't know, it might be the simplest thing: hey, I wanna say smth. for the press, don't know what...let's see, who's in war right now...Syria, aha.
Nato loves to kill leaders, so if Assad knows he going to die anyway, what is there to lose? from attacking Turkey with Bio scuds when they invade
which leaders did NATO kill? usually they try to get them in front of a court.. which is somewhat hard with cruise missiles and bombs only.. but still.
if his situation was hopeless it probably would be bette for him to spend his time in a western prison than the death penalty in Syria should the FSA win.
Though then again dictators usually feel kind of untouchable despite knowing better and they usually do not surrender even if it is their best option.
if leaders had been killed it was by their own people (Gadaffi, Saddam) or they just die of age, illness (Milosevic, Mubarak (probably soon)) - though there also is Charles Taylor who got sentenced in court
One could argue Khaddafi was served up to murderous rebels by NATO on a silver plate.
Libya never had a deliverable WMD program, so it was never a deterrent to an attack. Neither did Serbia, Neither did Iraq it turns out. All three leaders deaths was brought about by NATO in one way or another. Syria is a special case altogether. For one, they have a NATO member as a neighbor, which means they do not have to possess a long range deliverable system. Grad rockets and Artillery shells with Anthrax and other Bio systems will have no counter measures (no missile defense shield will work).. You can't have a deterrent and have no will or balls to use it. The Russians have cried wolf so many times over the past 60 years, that we Americans no longer take their Nukes all that seriously. No more drills in elementary schools etc and we are even expanding our ability to neutralize their stockpile right upto their borders and their response is nothing more then a threat to station some POS countermeasures.
What is NATO going to do wipe out everyone in Syria for the sake of killing one man if he attacks Turkey with WMD's ?
^^^ not even attack on Turkey with WMD. What Obama talked about a WMD attack on rebels is a red line.
You mean like what saddam did againts the kurds?
I was against NATO going into Libya and completely against any involvement in this current cluster****, but I won't lie and say I didn't crack a beer when I heard that Khaddafi got his ticket punched. I got another one in the fridge waiting for Assad and one for al-Zawahiri.
That was different, the chemicals were supplied by the West....
X2 Same here.
Posting Permissions
