Newsworldnewssyria

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 01:38 PM

The Syria Mess Could Have Been Avoided

?w=620&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=5ccd1315aa481a54b977425fee3db47a

West 'ignored Russian offer in 2012 to have Syria's Assad step aside'

The Obumbler did it again. Nor only was his Red Line Warning a farce but he is such an egomaniac that he cannot work with other world leaders to avoid conflicts. Sio tens of thousands died and it appears even more have fled, creating a massive change-to-be throughout the western world.

Read more @ http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/15/west-ignored-russian-offer-in-2012-to-have-syrias-assad-step-aside

18 replies, 734 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Syria Mess Could Have Been Avoided (Original post)
sargentodiaz Sep 2015 OP
MrSlayer666 Sep 2015 #1
Dexter Morgan Sep 2015 #3
OneLoudVoice Sep 2015 #4
Dexter Morgan Sep 2015 #5
OneLoudVoice Sep 2015 #6
Dexter Morgan Sep 2015 #7
OneLoudVoice Sep 2015 #8
Dexter Morgan Sep 2015 #9
OneLoudVoice Sep 2015 #10
Dexter Morgan Sep 2015 #11
OneLoudVoice Sep 2015 #12
Dexter Morgan Sep 2015 #13
OneLoudVoice Sep 2015 #14
Dexter Morgan Sep 2015 #15
OneLoudVoice Sep 2015 #17
Rephleshed Sep 2015 #16
Strange Luck Sep 2015 #2
smoke check Sep 2015 #18

Response to sargentodiaz (Original post)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 01:56 PM

1. Yeah, we could have not invaded Iraq.

That certainly would have done it. Worst foreign policy decision in American history. And the cancer that was the Bush cabal will haunt both us and the gulf region for years to come.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer666 (Reply #1)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 02:11 PM

3. LMAO it's still Bushes fault. If Obama had left a base there

instead of running out and leaving a power vacuum this could have been avoided.
But no Obama wanted to earn his Nobel peace prize by ending the war and let ISIS slaughter thousands of people but at least he meant well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dexter Morgan (Reply #3)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 04:46 PM

4. So basicly your solution

is dead US soldiers.

that does seem to be the Republican way.

Anything to avoid taking responsibility. Responsibility for your actions is poison to Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #4)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 05:33 PM

5. I know you don't understand but we are at war

with certain Muslim groups. Now we can take the war to them as Bush did or we can wait till they attack us again in America.
If Obama had left a large military presence in the Middle East ISIS could have been nipped in the bud with minimal injuries but instead thousands have died and been tortured.
An your military solution is to bury your head in the sand and hope it goes away
And no I am not for dead soldiers but I understand what need to be done to eradicate that scum from the face of the earth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dexter Morgan (Reply #5)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 06:32 PM

6. Lol. Talk about not understanding

ISIS would have just stayed underground till we did, killing a few US soldiers here and a few solderis there. Just like they were. Draining us. IF we had occupied IRaq another decade, they would have just come out in a decade instead of now. If we had stayed 50 years, then they would have come out in 50 years instead of now.

And in the mean time, we would have had US soldiers dying daily, the entire time, and resentment towards us growing, the entire time.

You can not fix a broken window with a hammer. It just wont work. All it will do is break the glass into smaller pieces. Your plan is no plan, all it is is guaranteed death for US soldiers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #6)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 06:40 PM

7. Wow so many false assumptions to try and make a point.

Why would I even bother to argue with your imagination your whole argument is based on the fact that ISIS would have stayed underground which you cannot prove so your post is moot.
Good day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dexter Morgan (Reply #7)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 07:23 PM

8. Yes, you do have a way of doing that

You cant argue with the truth.

ISIS did stay underground until we left. All those fighters were there. They didnt just suddenly pop into existance in 2006. They were there, biding their time, popping up to kill a few solders here and a few there while we were present in force. And then once we mostly backed out, they came out into the public to fight.

If we reinvaded Iraq tomorrow, ISIS would vanish fairly quickly. Sure, we'd catch a fair number. But the rest would disappear just like the Republican guard did before them. And then our soldiers would be murdered in dribs and drabs, day in and day out until we left. And the as soon as we were gone the same folks would pop up again and start the same business all over again. Sure it might get a new name. But the dead and tortured people would suffer just as much, even if it was delayed a bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #8)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 07:32 PM

9. Nope ISIS arose after we left a mish mash of jihadists that grew after we left.

Now that the Americans were not there to keep them in check they grew and expanded.

We had the cockroaches under control with minimal damage being caused but the pest exterminator left and they rapidly expanded.
You think if we had left Germany in 45 the nazis would not have flourished again and grew into a threat once again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dexter Morgan (Reply #9)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 08:17 PM

10. thank you for repeating my point and proving yourself wrong

Its always handy when folks make your argument for you.

ISIS was a ghost as long as we were there. As soon as we left, they popped up and started taking over.

If we went back, they would vanish into the woodwork once again. They would do "minimal damage", which is your little euphemism for murdering US troops on a daily basis, staying in hiding while the USA bleeds lives and treasure, influence and reputation for more years.

Then when we did someday leave (assuming you are not advocating making IRaq the 51st state) they would rapidly expand yet again.

Your comparison to Germany is laughable. We didn't stay in Germany to take on Nazis. We stayed because Russia stayed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #10)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 08:56 PM

11. And we should have stayed in Iraq just like the Iranian's did.

Duh is that really hard to understand?
Iran is the new USSR and we are giving them access to nuclear weapons,just like the commies hated us for what America is now you have added in religious mullahs who hate America.
Whose side are you on, the kumbyu let's give peace a chance side?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dexter Morgan (Reply #11)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 09:06 PM

12. lol.

Now you've just gone to gibberish.

If Iran is the new USSR, what does that make Russia? Perhaps they are the new China? Which would make China the new.... Germany? Where does it stop? Perhaps Iran is just Iran. And Unlike the Bush administration which saw Iran come within a whisker of obtaining nuclear weapons, Obama got then to agree to halt their nuclear weapons program.

Frankly, we have 3 basic options in the middle east. 1: We kill them. All. 2: We do a bush style halfass and build another generation of resentment, while bleeding out the lives of our armed forces and the resources of our country, putting a temporary lid on the pressure cooker bomb 3: we find a new way.

Im on the "lets make them want what we have and show them how to get it" side, not the "start an endless war and sacrifice US soldiers for no good reason side". I'm on Americas side. Which side are you on, the "kill as many foriegners as we can" side?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #12)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 09:21 PM

13. Option 1 kill them. Your problem is you think they think like you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dexter Morgan (Reply #13)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 10:08 PM

14. So mark you down for the "genocide" option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #14)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 10:41 PM

15. No me down for survival.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dexter Morgan (Reply #15)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 10:57 PM

17. You chose the genocide option

Have the guts to stand for what you believe instead of going all mealy mouthed PC weasel wordy about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dexter Morgan (Reply #9)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 10:44 PM

16. No, ISIS was there the whole time. They were "the insurgents" and "Al Quaeda in Iraq".

Its the same exact people.

And the "cockroaches" were always going to come back once we left. The point is, we couldn't afford to stay in any relevant capacity. The American people didn't want us to. The Iraqi people didn't want us to. Our allies didn't want us to. And we all knew a civil war like this was inevitable after we left. Us liberals warned about it years before it happened. We broke it and it was unfixable. Deal with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sargentodiaz (Original post)

Tue Sep 15, 2015, 02:08 PM

2. LOL

Love cons.

"Obama works with world leaders" headline gets turned into "Obama is weak and kowtows to what other nations want! We need a real leader who stands up for the US and demands things!"

"War with Syria averted, Assad stands down" turns into "We didn't get any of our people killed! We are weak, grab some troops and drop them over there! Grab your flags and bibles people, we need to kill some people not like us! God will judge our actions!"

Once again, it doesn't matter what the story is, cons will find a way to make it negative about Obama as they pine for the good ole days of sending our family, friends, loved ones into a war 'just because'. No wonder so many of them love them some militias, they get to play pretend war all the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sargentodiaz (Original post)

Wed Sep 16, 2015, 01:27 AM

18. The correct answer was to back Assad.

The Syrian Armed Forces at that time could have won their civil war early on, much like his dad did. No territory in Syria means no expansion into Iraq. al Baghdadi would just be another nut in the Middle East.

Much of the Obama administration's foreign policy, where one can logically be discerned at all, has been change for change's sake. We refused to save our long term ally in Egypt, the results were negative for us and the Egyptians. We backed Islamic militants over the guy we could control in Libya. We backed rebels in Syria based on some ephemeris notion of "the Syrian people yearning for democracy" which, while possible, was never going to happen with a destabilizing rebellion. I won't even mention Tunisia where islamic militants used to be under control and now fight it out with police in Tunis daily.

It turns out that our policy of "better than the alternative" is the correct one for the middle east.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Newsworldnewssyria