Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18

Thread: Syria

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,251
    vCash
    1500

    Syria

    Back in the old days, Hafez al-Assad was considered to be a horrible leader. A threat to peace in the region, that could spill out into the world. Those were the Cold War days.

    He died.

    His son, Bashar Assad takes over the family business. He graduated from medical school in Damascus, then went on to ophthalmology school in London. He looked like a reformer. He looked like a hope.

    Now, according to the news, his planes are loading up with Sarin Gas components. Sarin in a nerve agent, has been officially classed as a weapon of mass destruction and was outlawed in 1993.

    The use of this would be a violation of international law and would make Assad (assuming he ordered it, which would be a pretty safe assumption) a war criminal.

    If you were the President, you would have already warned him not to do it. Assuming he does use it, what do you do?
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    indianpolis - north side
    Posts
    9,449
    vCash
    1500
    I think nothing. Not a happy choice, but more a least worst choice.

    It doesn't seem that the US really has any allies in the fight. Just guys that hate us more than other guys hate us. The emotional temptation to give Iran a black eye by helping to get rid of Assad is nice, but not really worth the expense of people and treasure. This is one the guys in the Mid-East will have to solve on their own.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    25,683
    vCash
    1500
    If he starts using nerve gas, I think ideally the UN would intervene (this is what its actually supposed to be for) but I do think NATO likely should end him if he starts going to these measures. Arguably we should have ended him before but he now seems pretty damn vulnurable and about to launch even larger war crimes against his people.

    I say end him and then leave (no occupation, no nation building).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19,669
    vCash
    1500
    I think we need to be extremely careful about automatically believing these most recent reports.

    We've been down this road before...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,343
    vCash
    1500
    The state dept has already announced that, that is a deal breaker, as in Katie, Bar the door!, Goodnight Irene.
    Chemical weapon release = instantass whopping.
    I completely agree, but here is a bigger question in the umbrella of the context of the question.
    We liberate Kuwait, we liberate Iraq, we liberate Libya, we liberate Syria...now we spend tax dollars for these liberations and the only benefits that we as a country recieve are through corporate deals.
    The tax payers pay for the operation, and the Buisnesses get the reembursement...I never understood why people who identify as Rs, but donot benefit from the Corps constantly screwing us and making us thank them for it,never figure out whats going on.

    As part of ANY future leases, or agreements or commerce within the Borders of these Liberated countries, shouldnt we demand reparations from the corporations and Governments that benefitted from our loss? Or are we just suckers, over and over again? 10% annually until our expenses are repaid isnt asking much.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19,669
    vCash
    1500
    We're suckers. Most people refuse to believe to even acknowledge the HUGE profit motives of going to war, or the fact that we're almost always lied to in order to get us into these wars in the first place.

    As long as American Idol doesn't get cancelled and the new IPhone operates up-to-par, people generally don't care about the ramifications of war. They'll just wave their flags and play armchair generals like they always do...as long as it's not their son, daughter, brother, etc going to fight over there.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,251
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by The Schmooze View Post
    We're suckers. Most people refuse to believe to even acknowledge the HUGE profit motives of going to war, or the fact that we're almost always lied to in order to get us into these wars in the first place.

    As long as American Idol doesn't get cancelled and the new IPhone operates up-to-par, people generally don't care about the ramifications of war. They'll just wave their flags and play armchair generals like they always do...as long as it's not their son, daughter, brother, etc going to fight over there.
    First, it was my son and nephew who went over there. I had a Blue Star hanging in my window for a long time. I acknowledge the military industrial complex. I was alive and kicking when the phrase was created.

    I have not supported our nation building, but there are times when we do have a choice to make. We can choose to let the Muslims be slaughtered in Kosovo, or we could stop it. My nephew went to that one.

    If Assad actually uses Sarin, we can choose to interject ourselves, or, we can choose not to. My question to you is this. If you were convinced that Assad did use Sarin, and if you were the President, what would you do and why?
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,343
    vCash
    1500
    Personally I would go In, but that costs money cab, you cant honestly discuss the question as if there are no costs or consequences, so once again, If I liberate a country, I need to get paid back...thats not draconian IMO, and I wouldnt use it as a negotiating ploy, But Im not going to spend our blood and treasure for a Good feeling and a big thank you, especially when Our corporations then turn around and strong arm their way in and make a ton of money without paying taxes on it.resources are not unlimited.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,251
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    Personally I would go In, but that costs money cab, you cant honestly discuss the question as if there are no costs or consequences, so once again, If I liberate a country, I need to get paid back...thats not draconian IMO, and I wouldnt use it as a negotiating ploy, But Im not going to spend our blood and treasure for a Good feeling and a big thank you, especially when Our corporations then turn around and strong arm their way in and make a ton of money without paying taxes on it.resources are not unlimited.
    Has anyone ever accused you of conflating issues?
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    West Side
    Posts
    4,645
    vCash
    1500
    intervening in syria would be a good exercise to see if the world community can take a bigger role in these types of things, instead of relying on the USA. Libya was kinda the same, but I'm more thinking of the first Gulf War, where there was a general consensus and broader committment by a lot of countries. I'd like to see Europe, specifically France, show some spine and finish Assad instead of it being left up primarily to the USA.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,251
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by statquo View Post
    intervening in syria would be a good exercise to see if the world community can take a bigger role in these types of things, instead of relying on the USA. Libya was kinda the same, but I'm more thinking of the first Gulf War, where there was a general consensus and broader committment by a lot of countries. I'd like to see Europe, specifically France, show some spine and finish Assad instead of it being left up primarily to the USA.
    Assuming there is irrefutable proof that Assad is using Sarin, I agree that this would be a unifying force for the world to act in concert, and we would not be the sole cop on the beat. In point of fact, that is exactly where it seems to be headed. Russia, which is Assads biggest ally, is getting more antsy about this. I suspect not only would they not object, but would participate.

    One thing I am curious about. Why the specificity about France?
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    West Side
    Posts
    4,645
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by cabernetluver View Post
    Assuming there is irrefutable proof that Assad is using Sarin, I agree that this would be a unifying force for the world to act in concert, and we would not be the sole cop on the beat. In point of fact, that is exactly where it seems to be headed. Russia, which is Assads biggest ally, is getting more antsy about this. I suspect not only would they not object, but would participate.

    One thing I am curious about. Why the specificity about France?
    mostly because france was the colonial power of syria in the past, and they have been the most vocal european power in supporting and arming the rebels. from what ive read theyve been the most outspoken western power to overthrow assad through force. so i guess id like to see them put their money where their mouth is instead of hiding behind the USA if it does come down to that.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    West Side
    Posts
    4,645
    vCash
    1500
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2...pposition.html

    French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius has raised the prospect of sending "defensive weapons" to Syria's rebels.

    Fabius said Thursday his country will ask the European Union to consider lifting the arms embargo regarding Syria.

    He said, "We must not militarize the conflict" in Syria, "but it's obviously unacceptable that there are liberated zones and they're bombed" by the regime of Bashar Assad.

    In an interview with RTL radio, the minister said "the question of defensive arms will be raised," without providing details about what such arms would be.

    "We must find the right balance," he said.

    France quickly recognized a new opposition coalition formed Sunday as the Syrian people's sole representative — the first Western nation to do so.
    http://www.france24.com/en/20121115-...-syrian-rebels

    By becoming the first Western power to officially recognise the Syrian opposition coalition, France has put itself at the head of efforts to break the deadlock in the war-torn Middle Eastern nation.

    On Tuesday, President François Hollande said the coalition was the “sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people” and heralded it as “the provisional government of the future democratic Syria”, thereby seizing the initiative ahead of its more cautious neighbours in the West.

    A day after Hollande’s declaration, US President Barack Obama was less enthusiastic about Syria’s new opposition, declaring he was not ready to recognize it as “a government in exile”.

    Obama offered a more watered down version of Hollande’s words, saying the coalition was “a legitimate representation of the aspirations of the Syrian people”.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,508
    vCash
    1500
    The issue in Syria obviosly is that it isn't black and white. Plenty of crimes against humanity by the rebels aswell.
    I've read an interesting arctile (can't remember if it was a German or British article) that western countries have supported Assad's oppressive regime for years. Now that the public outcry over the civil war has started they publicly condemned Assad.
    It isn't that easy of a situation like a revolution of the people against an oppressive regime. It is about different religious groups from the arabian world trying to gain influence versus a relatively secular regime.
    I hope we stay as far away from Syria as possible regardless of war crimes. Although Turkey's solo run certainly didn't simplify the issue.
    Last edited by keymax; 12-07-2012 at 12:03 AM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    2,572
    vCash
    1500
    He's going to use the Sarin Gas to clear out the rebel strong hold in Damascus.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •