Are we (the USA) really going to launch an unprovoked attack upon Syria? Really

Jump to Last Post 1-10 of 10 discussions (53 posts)
  1. Missing Link profile image83
    Missing Linkposted 5 years ago

    Are we (the USA) really going to launch an unprovoked attack upon Syria?  Really?

    Obama said a long time ago if the Syrian regime used chemical weapons in Syria it would cross a line.   The last thing Asaad wanted was to have USA involvement.   So, it makes no sense whatsoever that his regime would use chemical weapons. I agree with Vladimir Putin who has said this defies all logic.  So, there must be another explanation like someone else or some other country manipulated this to happen, perhaps it was an accident of some sort, etc.

    I'm not convinced at all that we (the USA) are in possession of ironclad evidence that it was a purposeful attack by the Asaad regime.

  2. Ericdierker profile image46
    Ericdierkerposted 5 years ago

    My friend. We are already boots on the ground there. We are already manipulating and actively involved. This is what we do. The tide is already shifting. What you should concern yourself with is how damn fast we can get out. By the time you read a "news" report about our involvement, some of our people are already extracted.
    Sometimes I shake my head in wonder that people think we send in combat forces like ducks. We have been doing this stuff since the 40's of the last century.
    By the time you think you have enough intelligence to get belligerent it is de facto and done.
    Before Congress acts publicly our major role there will be done. Our hard part will be deciding whether to leave it alone or try to help shape the reformation. Our people already have that scenario done.
    Assad is killing children. War kills children. War is bad. Syria is not a place for "arms dealers" of importance to make money. End of conflict,, it does no one well.
    Syria needs to be resolved. It is ruining commerce. Syria needs to be resolved it is killing children.
    We are the Ugly Americans. Get over it!  You watch. This deal is done within 90 days. Assad is gone already. We are already in Iran and that "civil" conflict will begin in that time. We have got to destabilize regimes that become rogue.
    North Korea and Iran are destabilizing to prosperity. Syria was but Syria is like the last quarter of a football game with one team ahead by 40 points.
    It is more important for us to end Syria because of Iran than because of Syria.
    But Children are dying and that is not part of the plan. Just like girls getting to go to school. There is a bottom line. Assad is a dead man walking. He just blew it and let it go on too long. So Russia and China will diplomatic speak but not intervene.

    1. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Its all done at the whim of the big shadow masters who run the multinational corporations that make their fortunes from war. Like Halliburton, the Federal Reserve, hidden with names like Black Water. It all about money as is NATO and the UN and WMF

    2. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You seem cynical but I suspect you are also right on.  Part of me thinks like you do plus I have connections who say similar things as you.   
      There was a mass uprising a few years ago in Iran---wonder why we did not help more then?

    3. ChristinS profile image94
      ChristinSposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly right Borsia - but people don't want to see that, they still see this as some "moral" issue we have to step in. How moral of us was it to kill all those Iraqi people over WMD's that don't exist? what people believe still baffles me.

    4. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Lunar Landing, Holocaust, schools bombed in Afghanistan because girls attend --- all hoax's?  I have never heard an Iraqi complain about liberation. But I will make sure to tell the sailors I see today that they are just stooges.

    5. ChristinS profile image94
      ChristinSposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Don't go there with me Eric, my family is all military. They know Iraq was a farce because some were there - were you? didn't think so.

    6. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Well yes I have been there. But I do not think It is relevant. But you beat me hands down --- anyone who can call 100,000+ dead a "farce" is way above my pay grade.

    7. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I am afraid it is you who don't know what you are talking about @Christin or at least how to clearly state it. Iraq was no farce to the people who fought and died in it, you disrespect them, they weren't laughing, just as I wasn't laughing in Vietnam

    8. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you my friend for serving along side My father and uncles in law. Perhaps my wife would not be alive if not for your service.

    9. ChristinS profile image94
      ChristinSposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I don't dishonor their service, I disrespect a government that lied to send them to die for no good reason. Tell my sister her best friend had to die of suicide after returning home - he never belonged there none of them did.

    10. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Nope I will tell the girl Now twenty who just graduated from school. I will tell the little boy who now has clean drinking water. And I will tell the Vet who got shot carrying a little girl out of an IED explosion. I will tell them they are dupes.

    11. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I love it when somehow seeing Vietnam or Iraq for what they were is disrespectful of those who served there, like they had a choice.
      McNamara admitted on his death bed that the Gulf of Tonka was fabricated and the war was a horrible mistake.

    12. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Sorry buddy I have a wife and a child that would not be alive if not for our "conflict" in Vietnam. Call it as you see it. But I sure love this lady born there in the 70's

    13. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were farces, many times over.  Iraq was a war we weren't supposed to be in, but in it we were.  Once committed, we should have conducted it like it was WW II, instead, they toyed with it like it was Granada.

    14. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You can't fight a full scale mechanized war against a gruella foe.
      This is why we lost the war in Vietnam, and really haven't won in Iraq even though we took out the official Iraqi military in something like 2 months. Things are going back to chaos.

    15. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      @Borsia, of course you are right.  I was more referring to the "in it to win it" concept of WW II, regardless of the strategy needed.  The one Bush, et al used was wrong.  Gen Petraeus  and Obama, in his support of his concept, were right.

    16. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The only ones who can possibly win in such a situation are the people of the country. But it has to be their doing not the act of a foreign power.
      The USSR failed in Afghanistan and they went "all in" with no holds barred.
      Its just not winnable.

    17. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      That is how we finally got the upper hand in Iraq.  Instead of fighting against the Sunni's and a lot of Shi'ites; Petraeus, through diplomacy, civic actions, and bribes peeled them away from al Qaeda and over to our effort rather than fighting us.

    18. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      We won against the Iraqi military but Iraq lost. Now we are leaving it is falling back into the hands of the extremists. Terrorist acts are way up infighting among the different groups is running rampant and there is no reason to see improvement.

    19. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It depends on where you sit, doesn't it.  Kurds would probably not agree with you, the families of the 250,000 - 1,000,000 Hussein gassed or whisked off in the dead of night to kill, probably wouldn't agree either.  Ba'athists would, however.

    20. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The fractions will continue to kill each other just as they have for the last millennium.
      We directly and indirectly killed more than Saddam did and they in worse shape now than when we attacked them.
      Regardless it wasn't our problem or business

  3. ChristinS profile image94
    ChristinSposted 5 years ago

    It wasn't. It is a lie just like Iraq was and it's for profit and control of the oil fields - that's all it is, all it has ever been about. America doesn't get involved in humanitarian crises in a country unless it's of some benefit to them. It is a sad state of affairs that I wish people would wake up and see is true.  Fortunately, this time I think more people are highly skeptical after the antics of the Bush years. They saw that it was a pack of lies and are much more aware this time they are being sold a bill of goods.

    1. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Oh missy -- look up the USS Hope and USS Comfort (AH-6) and USS Mercy (AH-8)  Those babies are bad ass. They sail so fast and so far. They got weapons of mass love and humanity. Where there is a tsunami, where there is famine. This horrible ships are

    2. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Great points @Erick

    3. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The Iraq WMD thing is hanging over our heads.

    4. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Ah -- no it is not -- only in American Mass Media. If some talking head is still saying we should not have gone into Iraq Wow!! I would really like a link -- missing or otherwise to that fine guru. I want to forward it to the women have graduated.

  4. chuckd7138 profile image76
    chuckd7138posted 5 years ago

    I really don't have an answer per se, but I do have this question.

    If Obama voted against going to war in Iraq in 2003 and has spent his entire tenure in the Oval Office with an agenda of bringing home the troops and ending our involvement in the War on Terror, why then would he speak of an "unprovoked" military action against Syria?

    All I am trying to do is present a different angle. If a guy has spent his whole political career as an anti-war, anti-conflict advocate (and hell, even anti-military in some of his words), where is the logic in him starting a war/military action just for grins and giggles? So, it might not be "unprovoked". The message could be seen as "If you violate the rules/laws of war, you will face the consequences of it."

    And as for Putin, he comes from the Communist Soviet Union. Yes, he is President of the Russian Republic now, but he has made it very clear time and again that he still believes in Soviet Communism. He hates democracy, hates capitalism, and hates the USA. So, of course he will find every opportunity to criticize us and anything we do in regards to foreign affairs.

    1. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      He has a history of saying one thing while doing another and has always been in the pockets of big money.

    2. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I hear u.  I think our establishment sees it like this---we r the global police with the most power and means to punish.  Obama should not have said awhile back that  using a chem attack would cross a line cause now it has happened--.

    3. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Obama has always been a "talk first, think later" kinda guy

  5. My Esoteric profile image91
    My Esotericposted 5 years ago

    From the phrasing of your question, it sounds like you would sit ideally by while Russian invaded Canada; so long as they stayed off of American soil, we are not "provoked", therefore no harm no foul.

    Of course Assad would use chemical weapons.  He assumed the world has no balls or gonads, plus he has got the Russians in his hip pocket.  The English only proved his point that he can use chemical weapons to his hearts content and people with your political persuasion are happy to let him do it. 

    Assad knows all of this.  He also knows he was, or maybe is, losing.  He certainly was until his terrorist group the Hezbollah bailed him out a few weeks ago.  Assad has all of the reason in the world to use WMD.

    1. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You have some good points but why us?   What do you think about the USA not going thru the UN when we always tell others to take it to the UN.  We are saying heck with UN---we will do what we want to do---I think much of the world resents that.

  6. duffsmom profile image59
    duffsmomposted 5 years ago

    I'm not sure that I would agree with the term unprovoked.  I don't think a strike on Syria is the answer but quite honestly I don't know what is.   If Syria used chemical weapons on their own people, why doesn't the Saudi military get in there and do something...why does it have to be the US?

    And what are the consequences of our involvement with regard to retaliation against Jordan and Israel?  Wish I knew what was right.

    1. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Right!  Why doesn't someone else closer do something?  Why us?  The Arab League has suspended Syria from the league...  We are not going thru the UN which I also don't like---we always tell others they have to go thru the UN...

  7. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

    If any of you can stand by as they deliver  a chemical death to a child and not be , even blindingly angry and resolute in its  ending ,  I feel sorry for your naiveté', ......remember a guy named Hitler ? Hmmm? .....bring on the "controversy "!

    1. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I just listened to Sen Rand Paul embarrass himself answer SefDef's rhetorical question to him "Is it more or less likely Assad will use WMD if we do nothing", to which Paul responds "No one knows for sure"!!  What an idiot.

    2. ChristinS profile image94
      ChristinSposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Rwanda, Darfur, apparently our country can turn a blind eye when it doesn't benefit their financial agenda. It's not that I don't personally care, I mind that we are being lied to about the real motive.

    3. profile image0
      CalebSparksposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The US doesn't have solid proof that chem. weapons were used or who used them. Read this:  http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/08 … g-roberts/

    4. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Chem puts mass murder into a whole new realm and requires immediate response, as odd as that sounds.  As I understand it, several nations now regret their inaction in Rwanda and wish they had chosen differently. Darfur, million tears; diplomatic end

    5. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Well now ahorseback and My esoteric are you two do not know what you are talkiing about. I live in a town where battle fatigues are more normal than ties. All Volunteer and two were pumping there hands up and yelling Syria Hoorah Syria Hoorah.

    6. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Not sure what you mean @Eric

    7. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Caleb--I did read article-thanks!  We do seem selective n which atrocity we get involved n but makes sense too...or does it? I also did not get Eric's comment..  Horseback-we ain't sure who did what though but I hear ya.

    8. Ericdierker profile image46
      Ericdierkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Sorry about that comment. I think my boy came in and jumped in my lap with a Popsicle instead of delete submit got hit..I know I wanted to make the point that our military -- grunts that is, are behind taking action. Their lives not mine.

    9. My Esoteric profile image91
      My Esotericposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      As soon as I read "... the US puppet, Cameron, who ..." in the article @Caleb posted, I knew this was a piece of comedic satire and not to be taken seriously, so I stopped wasting my time..

  8. Borsia profile image42
    Borsiaposted 5 years ago

    One thing that isn't mentioned in the American media is the question of whether it isn't just as likely, or even more likely, that the "rebel fighters", most of who are Islamic extremists like Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and Taliban did it?
    We know that these groups have no  regard for human life and this is who Obama is talking about aiding, our sworn enemies who have vowed to the destruction of the West especially America.

    Having the US & NATO get involved plays right into their hands and is probably the last thing the Syrian government would want to see happen.

    Look at history such as WWII when the Soviets under Stalin dressed in captured German uniforms and terrorized Eastern Europe murdering, raping and torturing hundreds of thousands then playing it for all they could against Germany.

    The US should stay out of it completely, for that matter we should get out of the Middle East completely.

    None of it is in America's best interest. It is ALL for the profiteers and they don't care who wins or looses or how many die or have their lives destroyed so long as they fill their pockets.
    Obama is in league with them and always has been.

    The problem with history is that we never learn a single thing from it! It just keeps on repeating and so long as the Democrats and Republicans are in control America will continue to fall in their wake.

    For those who love to harp on Hitler and WWII I suggest you watch this documentary about what really happened politically leading up to the war and during it.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thxwswhq6d4

    Stop looking at one side of every coin and thinking you are seeing the whole picture. You are only seeing the views that those who won want you to see!

    Until you have lived outside the US you will never realize how much your government controls what you see, hear and think!!!

    1. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I am not convinced at all that the chemical attack was purposely done by the Asaad regime.  I do not believe our USA politicians who say they are sure.  It looks like we are going to attack though.  Hope we are doing the right thing--what a mess!

    2. Borsia profile image42
      Borsiaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Just remember how they were so sure before we attacked Iraq and all their WMDs.
      These people, and I use the term vaguely, will do anything to serve their puppet masters. They are OWNED !!!

    3. ChristinS profile image94
      ChristinSposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I live in the US and still understand - but that's because I open my eyes and look at sources outside the US for my info. I agree with you about this, it's about money always has been, always will be.

    4. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Borsia,

      I don't agree with everything you say here but agree with enough of it  to reward you with the best answer.  Congrats!  Thank you everybody for having participated and further comments, if possible once best answer is chosen, are welcome.

  9. profile image0
    delleaposted 5 years ago

    This video offers significant evidence and a good answer to your question...
    http://youtu.be/6Wh_j981T0c

    1. Missing Link profile image83
      Missing Linkposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      but it does not address my question per chemical attack, etc., the rebels are a patchwork of groups, one cannibal nut case does not represent all of them no more than Jeffrey Dahmer represents all Americans, I hear you though--I do

  10. Missing Link profile image83
    Missing Linkposted 5 years ago

    Since my initial post, it does appear more that it was Asaad who launched the attack but I'm still not totally sure---who is?

    But I still don't think we should attack and here are just a few reasons.  We have no significant UN resolutions.  The British voted no on getting involved.   A majority of Americans don't want us to attack.  A great many (a  majority??) of or politicians don't want to attack.  We will see what the official vote is sometime in the next week per Congress, etc.  If our political body votes not to attack then Obama will be a nut case if he goes ahead and does it.  If he does do it, without any backing, then it is aggression by us in my opinion.  Sorry for those who have died there.

    Now if we bomb and it turns out great, Asaad leaves,  a functioning govt takes hold, etc.  that would be nice....I don't see that happening though  do you??  It would still be aggression by us though if Obama does it without any backing. 

    I think the Soviets are getting more upset also at us---not good.

    Let them fight and let's fix things here in the USA.

Closed to reply
 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)