[Bucco]

Originally Posted by patfla06

I'm just tired of seeing the U.S. as the "world's policemen."
We put our troops at risk for countries that hate us to begin
with and never appreciate our efforts.

We need to stay out of other countries problems!
We never seem to have an understanding of the problems
To begin with.

I am empathetic with populations/countries that do not
have our democracy and freedom.

That being said DEMOCRACY does NOT WORK with people
who do not believe in the sanctity of life.

We need to stay out of Syria!

Generally speaking I have been against all this action, inaction, whatever and can make a case, but what makes this more confusing is that I can also make a case for using military.

Syria and Iran are allies. Iran has also these same weapons....disregarding what Syria has done will embolden Iran. Why we did not step up earlier is a good question. Remember the President has drawn a few red lines with Iran also.

Also, keep in mind, it is frustrating being the cops, but with power comes responsibility. We have lost much respect the past few years in the middle east and while we should not be involved in other countries internal problems, can anyone say that this "problem" stays internal ? So many countries are backed and allies of Al Queda and have a known goal of bringing the worst of weapon to our shores. Do we embolden them and just allow them to continue.

As I said, I honestly can make a case on either side.

I do not in any way feel that action is required because we are "good guys" and to send a message to the world, etc. This has been going on for years.....well over 100,000 people have died....men, women and children. A lot of war crimes have been committed in that time and all we did was give it very small lip service.

What will swing how I feel is hearing, and I have yet to hear it, is EXACTLY what the President plans to do. I am still not clear on that. I do not know what it means to "hold the regime responsible"....does that mean topple the regime ? If so, that is more than a few missel strikes. That I still do not understand.

I am on board with both Senate and Congress debating and voting, but oppose any kind of political games which are beginning. The President MUST be part of this debate....MUST.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Serious question...

Why hurry ?

President will be in Russia this coming week, and he is the most important person in the debate ? Doesn't he have to explain what he intends to do, and hopefully it is not just phoned in.

This is not new...this is a few years old. Not sure why anyone would hurry except to make some obscure political points.

Actually the g20 is Thursday and Friday and then add travel..so why call everyone back

BBC News - Syria crisis: David Cameron supports Obama's stance

I believe that the Obama Adminstration should consider the consequences of a strike on Syria very carefully before taking any military action and should try to get as much consensus as possible in these actions. Cannot see how and why the Syrian regime could hide chemical weapons as there are probably quite a number of satellites and other intelligence gathering agents targeting Syria from many countries which have an interest in that region-- Russia, China, the United States, the UK, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Saudia Arabia, etc.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

BBC News - Syria crisis: David Cameron supports Obama's stance

I believe that the Obama Adminstration should consider the consequences of a strike on Syria very carefully before taking any military action and should try to get as much consensus as possible in these actions. Cannot see how and why the Syrian regime could hide chemical weapons as there are probably quite a number of satellites and other intelligence gathering agents targeting Syria from many countries which have an interest in that region-- Russia, China, the United States, the UK, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Saudia Arabia, etc.

Syria and chemical weapons is not new. They have had them for many many years and we know exactly where they are. Same with N Korea an others.

Getting consensus is good...the stumbling, bumbling up to here was not so good.

As long as they do not allow this to become totally political.

[kittygilchrist]

israelnationnews.com click arutz sheva
Arab League Ministers to Call for Syria Strike

Report: Ministers will issue a call for destruction of Assad's defenses, to open way for Free Syria Army.



By Arutz Sheva
First Publish: 9/1/2013, 4:08 PM (middle eastern time)


Arab League meeting in Cairo

The foreign ministers of the Arab League, who are convening in Cairo, are expected to adopt a resolution in support of “any military attack” against the Syrian regime, according to Maariv.


Specifically, the foreign ministers will call for a military action to destroy the Assad regime's defense arrays, in order to open the way to the conquest of Syria by the Free Syria Army.


The Arab League has been discussing the crisis in Syria at a closed-door meeting in Cairo since Sunday morning. Ambassador-level talks were followed by the foreign ministers' meeting that was scheduled to start in the afternoon.


The meeting had been scheduled for Tuesday, but was advanced to Sunday "in light of rapid developments in the Syria situation and based on the request of several Arab states", Ahmed Ben Helli, Arab League deputy chief, said on Saturday.


Al Jazeera reported that Ahmed Aljarba, the head of the Syrian National Council (SNC), the opposition umbrella group backed by the West and Arab states, would be giving a speech at the foreign ministers' meeting


During the ambassadors' session, permanent representatives condemned the August 21 chemical weapons massacre at Ghota al Sharkiya, calling it a "horrible crime carried out with internationally prohibited chemical weapons", and placed the "entire responsibility" on President Bashar al-Assad's government.


The Arab League suspended Syria's membership in 2011 after Assad's government failed to abide by an Arab peace plan that aimed to end the conflict in Syria. In March, the 22-member organization offered Syria's seat to the SNC and decided to let its member nations arm the rebels battling Assad's government.


John Kerry, the US secretary of state, mentioned the Arab League among a list of allies "ready to respond" to the alleged chemical-weapons attack.


However, Arab League members such as Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon and Tunisia, which have faced recent internal conflicts of their own, were opposed to foreign intervention.

[kittygilchrist]

http://http://www.aljazeera.com/news...581262102.html
Report that Saudi Arabia backs US strike.

[DianeM]

I'm sorry Kitty but I don't believe we will be supported if we partake in this folly. Let the Saudis strike first and we can follow them for a change.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by kittygilchrist

israelnationnews.com click arutz sheva
Arab League Ministers to Call for Syria Strike

Report: Ministers will issue a call for destruction of Assad's defenses, to open way for Free Syria Army.



By Arutz Sheva
First Publish: 9/1/2013, 4:08 PM (middle eastern time)


Arab League meeting in Cairo

The foreign ministers of the Arab League, who are convening in Cairo, are expected to adopt a resolution in support of “any military attack” against the Syrian regime, according to Maariv.


Specifically, the foreign ministers will call for a military action to destroy the Assad regime's defense arrays, in order to open the way to the conquest of Syria by the Free Syria Army.


The Arab League has been discussing the crisis in Syria at a closed-door meeting in Cairo since Sunday morning. Ambassador-level talks were followed by the foreign ministers' meeting that was scheduled to start in the afternoon.


The meeting had been scheduled for Tuesday, but was advanced to Sunday "in light of rapid developments in the Syria situation and based on the request of several Arab states", Ahmed Ben Helli, Arab League deputy chief, said on Saturday.


Al Jazeera reported that Ahmed Aljarba, the head of the Syrian National Council (SNC), the opposition umbrella group backed by the West and Arab states, would be giving a speech at the foreign ministers' meeting


During the ambassadors' session, permanent representatives condemned the August 21 chemical weapons massacre at Ghota al Sharkiya, calling it a "horrible crime carried out with internationally prohibited chemical weapons", and placed the "entire responsibility" on President Bashar al-Assad's government.


The Arab League suspended Syria's membership in 2011 after Assad's government failed to abide by an Arab peace plan that aimed to end the conflict in Syria. In March, the 22-member organization offered Syria's seat to the SNC and decided to let its member nations arm the rebels battling Assad's government.


John Kerry, the US secretary of state, mentioned the Arab League among a list of allies "ready to respond" to the alleged chemical-weapons attack.


However, Arab League members such as Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon and Tunisia, which have faced recent internal conflicts of their own, were opposed to foreign intervention.

Part of destroying the Assad regime is what you get in return. Be wary of how we can get played by Al Queda.....do not look at the rebels as a bunch of good guys here.

This is a very tough situation. I totally understand both sides of what I hope will be a non political debate without the games

[kittygilchrist]

'Every possible scenario': Israel readies anti-missile defenses for probable Syrian strike ? RT News

Poll reports 2/3 of Israelis support US strike.

[kittygilchrist]

Originally Posted by DianeM

I'm sorry Kitty but I don't believe we will be supported if we partake in this folly. Let the Saudis strike first and we can follow them for a change.

Hi Diane, the point is not for the Saudis to militarily come in...I think they have no interest in destabilizing relations further between Arab nations.
The point was to say that the Arab League opposes chemical warfare to counter black and white thinking about Muslims.
Some folks are saying things like:
Muslims/Arabs just want to kill each other and...
Obama is a Muslim so he wouldn't kill a Muslim (except Bin Laden?)--

Not all Muslims/Arabs are terrorists. Our blindly thinking of them all as enemies just wears me out.

[rp001]

Originally Posted by kittygilchrist

'Every possible scenario': Israel readies anti-missile defenses for probable Syrian strike ? RT News

Poll reports 2/3 of Israelis support US strike.

And at what point did it become Israel's call as to whether or not we strike another country? How many of the pro war folks on here have actually been in or fought a war? It is easy to say, "Let's hit them" but remember this, those body bags that will be coming home will be our younger generation. This is an expense I for one am not willing to bear, under these conditions. Frankly I don't care what the Saudis or the Israelis support, I'm for supporting OUR needs, not theirs.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by rp001

And at what point did it become Israel's call as to whether or not we strike another country? How many of the pro war folks on here have actually been in or fought a war? It is easy to say, "Let's hit them" but remember this, those body bags that will be coming home will be our younger generation. This is an expense I for one am not willing to bear, under these conditions. Frankly I don't care what the Saudis or the Israelis support, I'm for supporting OUR needs, not theirs.

You folks are getting carried away.

I need to hear EXACTLY what the President has in mind..specifics. Last I heard there would be NO...ZERO troops on the ground.

As far as Israel, keep in mind....they are surrounded by these guys. They will always want to bring them down and limit what they can do. They KNOW that if we strike, they will get hit in retaliation, but still favor a hit.

AND allow me, as much as you do not want to hear it, every decision we make in the middle east considered Israel. Not their polls, but their security. EVERY decision made in the middle east.

[l2ridehd]

Kitty, your news source is blatantly clouding the real picture. For starters calling the rebels the "Free Syria Army" is a farce. The are funded, provided arms, support and led by Al Queda. That is who will run Syria if they win.

As for the Arab league support, yes they will be completely behind it. Why? because having Al Queda run Syria is much better for them then having Assad run Syria. However I bet they will vote for support in principal and not commit one peso or person to the effort.

Why does Israel support a US strike? They want to know we will follow through with our commitments in any Middle East conflict. They also want those chemical weapons destroyed before they fall into the hands of Al Queda. And to let Iran know we will follow through on our "do not allow nuclear arms" commitment to Israel.

Our leadership in Washington has bungled this beyond belief. It is an utter and complete failure of our foreign policy.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by l2ridehd

Kitty, your news source is blatantly clouding the real picture. For starters calling the rebels the "Free Syria Army" is a farce. The are funded, provided arms, support and led by Al Queda. That is who will run Syria if they win.

As for the Arab league support, yes they will be completely behind it. Why? because having Al Queda run Syria is much better for them then having Assad run Syria. However I bet they will vote for support in principal and not commit one peso or person to the effort.

Why does Israel support a US strike? They want to know we will follow through with our commitments in any Middle East conflict. They also want those chemical weapons destroyed before they fall into the hands of Al Queda. And to let Iran know we will follow through on our "do not allow nuclear arms" commitment to Israel.

Our leadership in Washington has bungled this beyond belief. It is an utter and complete failure of our foreign policy.

On all of this I can agree with you, especially on the questionable sources that the fact of the make up of those we will help with a strike.

[NotGolfer]

Originally Posted by l2ridehd

Kitty, your news source is blatantly clouding the real picture. For starters calling the rebels the "Free Syria Army" is a farce. The are funded, provided arms, support and led by Al Queda. That is who will run Syria if they win.

As for the Arab league support, yes they will be completely behind it. Why? because having Al Queda run Syria is much better for them then having Assad run Syria. However I bet they will vote for support in principal and not commit one peso or person to the effort.

Why does Israel support a US strike? They want to know we will follow through with our commitments in any Middle East conflict. They also want those chemical weapons destroyed before they fall into the hands of Al Queda. And to let Iran know we will follow through on our "do not allow nuclear arms" commitment to Israel. Our leadership in Washington has bungled this beyond belief. It is an utter and complete failure of our foreign policy.

Well said...

"IF" we don't show support of Israel (and this goes for "any" country)....I say "God help us!!" Along with this there will always be "wars and rumors of wars"........ From the standpoint of the reasoning of men and men alone, there are NO answers.

[rp001]

I don't see this as "limited" and think it will quickly escalate. Every conflict we've ever been in starts the same way. This will only serve to embolden and consolidate the factionalized Arabs into one with a common enemy, us. We need to learn from history. Frankly I would rather see Arabs killing one another than psychotic "Jihad" against us. The only winners will the the giant military corporations that control our government, such as Halliburton, raeython (sp), etc., and the list goes on. Even Europe has not jumped on the bandwagon, perhaps they have learned a lesson we obviously have not.