Syria Conflict

[-EnVus-]

So I have followed a little of this not as much as some im sure but....I see Obama wants to finally do something and get involved and help the opposition. Issue I have is we are sending weapons in support but to good people and bad with majority Al-Qaeda.
Now Egypt being as they have been lately actually did an about face today and released this...
CAIRO, June 15 (Reuters) - Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi said he had cut all diplomatic ties with Damascus on Saturday and called for a no-fly zone over Syria, pitching the most populous Arab state firmly against President Bashar al-Assad.

Addressing a rally called by Sunni Muslim clerics in Cairo, the Sunni Islamist head of state said: "We decided today to entirely break off relations with Syria and with the current Syrian regime."

He also warned Assad's allies in the Iranian-backed Lebanese Shi'ite militia Hezbollah to pull back from fighting in Syria.

I like the Idea of getting more support from Syria neighbors this is what needs to be done. I don't think we should be sending any weapons but if we do then make sure its ones we know are obsolete to our current use. The Opposition wants and request Anti aircraft weapons and we are to smart to fall for that but they also want a NO FLY ZONE.
Russia has now taken this and addressed it as...
Russia's foreign minister on Saturday warned that any effort by the U.S. and its allies to impose a no-fly zone over Syria would violate international law.


I myself think and most know that Russia will be involved before its to late and it will be for Assad. They have to much at stake with money and contracts with Assad. Russia is Afraid of its weapons and secrets that also lie with Syria that will be revealed.

[BanginJimmy]

We had a chance early on to help the Syrian opposition. We passed on that chance and waited until the syrian opposition is made up of a hodge podge of islamist and terror groups. We supply weapons to them, we will be supplying weapons to the Taliban in Asscrackistan an Pakistan. We will be supplying weapons to Al Qeada is Yemen and Jordan. And we will be supplying weapons to Hezbollah for use in Gaza.


Unless we put troops on the ground or aircraft in the air, any help we will provide will be quickly funneled back to groups actively fighting against us.

[Sinfix_15]

"Let Allah sort it out"

[-EnVus-]

We had a chance early on to help the Syrian opposition. We passed on that chance and waited until the syrian opposition is made up of a hodge podge of islamist and terror groups. We supply weapons to them, we will be supplying weapons to the Taliban in Asscrackistan an Pakistan. We will be supplying weapons to Al Qeada is Yemen and Jordan. And we will be supplying weapons to Hezbollah for use in Gaza.


Unless we put troops on the ground or aircraft in the air, any help we will provide will be quickly funneled back to groups actively fighting against us.

I also agree....It could have been done sooner been then it would have been seen as a premature action on US part.
Also I think its turning into more of a religious war cause its Shiites fighting Sunnis and growing. I see now the only reason Egypt has got involved is cause Hezbollah.

[Sinfix_15]

U.S. considers taking in Syrian refugees - latimes.com

[Elbow]

U.S. considers taking in Syrian refugees - latimes.com

Doesn't sound like the US accepting refugees is a new thing.

[-EnVus-]

Assad finally said something I agree with....
"If the Europeans ship weapons, Europe's backyard becomes a terrorists' place, and Europe will pay a price for it," Assad said in Arabic comments translated into German.

Chaos in Syria would result in "the direct export of terrorism to Europe," he warned. "Terrorists will return to Europe with fighting experience and extremist ideologies."

Assad also insisted that European efforts to distinguish between good and bad rebels when it comes to shipping weapons amounts to "differentiating between `good' and `bad' Taliban a few years ago, or a `good' and `bad' al-Qaida."

[David88vert]

Two things:

1) The US has no business getting into another Vietnam. If you are going to fight a war, you need a definition for victory that is clear and obtainable. There is not clear definition here, so we should not be getting involved without that. Shipping weapons is getting involved as we are clearly picking a side to back.

2) Obama wants to ship assault weapons to the rebels so that they can fight against a government that does not represent them; however, he tells Americans that we do not need assault weapons, as the government continues to assert more influence into our daily lives. The irony is funny and sad at the same time.

[Sinfix_15]

Two things:

1) The US has no business getting into another Vietnam. If you are going to fight a war, you need a definition for victory that is clear and obtainable. There is not clear definition here, so we should not be getting involved without that. Shipping weapons is getting involved as we are clearly picking a side to back.

2) Obama wants to ship assault weapons to the rebels so that they can fight against a government that does not represent them; however, he tells Americans that we do not need assault weapons, as the government continues to assert more influence into our daily lives. The irony is funny and sad at the same time.

Obama and his band of democratic misfits should all go to syria armed with a handgun and 7 bullets to help fight with the rebels.

I'm not sure how i feel about the constant irony of the president..... sometimes i convince myself that he is just an ignorant buffoon who doesnt notice it and then sometimes i feel like he's doing it on purpose to mock america.

[BanginJimmy]

Two things:

1) The US has no business getting into another Vietnam. If you are going to fight a war, you need a definition for victory that is clear and obtainable. There is not clear definition here, so we should not be getting involved without that. Shipping weapons is getting involved as we are clearly picking a side to back.

Agreed. Unfortunately, the conflict over there is FAR more complex than Vietnam ever was. There is no possible way to pick the side of a winner. No matter who eventually wins, they will be hostile to the US.

2) Obama wants to ship assault weapons to the rebels so that they can fight against a government that does not represent them; however, he tells Americans that we do not need assault weapons, as the government continues to assert more influence into our daily lives. The irony is funny and sad at the same time.

I understand your point but far too oversimplified.

[-EnVus-]

This is the US going into a gang war and either way both gangs will still attack us

[BanginJimmy]

This is the US going into a gang war and either way both gangs will still attack us

Exactly.

Sent from my Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 2

[-EnVus-]

I feel so sorry for the innocent people involved but also kinda wish Hamas would get involved. If Hezbollah wants to start shit then only group i see turning them back is Hamas.

[BanginJimmy]

I feel so sorry for the innocent people involved but also kinda wish Hamas would get involved. If Hezbollah wants to start shit then only group i see turning them back is Hamas.

It really is such a cluster fuck over there. It takes no win situation to a whole new level.

Sent from my Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 2