So, when is the U.S. gonna start the air strikes in Syria?

I just spent hours outside playing with Cason and taking walks in the forest and now we are back here and Cason's Meet the Small Potatoes video (which I think is pretty cute and kinda like watching) is on ... so, yeah, no news....
And though I haven't checked my old thread on the possible invasion of Syria (going there next I guess if I have time before I have to give Case his bath), I am assuming it was shut down because people don't know how to be mature enough to just discuss a topic without attacking other people personally (even if people don't see eye to eye they don't need to always get so defensive and take things personally, sheesh!).... But, anyways, I am starting this thread to see if there is any new news on what is going on with that? So, it is pretty much a definite that the U.S. IS going to strike and are going at it alone, correct? Any idea of when things are going to happen or anything else new happening?

And please, to certain people who can't behave--- if you can't post in this thread without personally insulting others, please do not post in it. It would be nice to have a place here where people can discuss the facts of what is going on- as well as their opinions, without it getting shut down because it starts to resemble a kindergarten.
So, talk on the topic... not personally about other people discussing the topic. Thank you very much!
(edit-I checked that thread and I have no idea why it was closed because there are posts missing from when I last saw it- but yeah, no more of the back and forth pointless stuff that was going on in it I guess... I'm actually slightly confused so hopefully we are even ALLOWED to talk about it here- if not, I guess this one will get shut down too?)

 

It's hard to say, because last I heard, Chairman Osama, fearless leader, was pretty much being backed into a corner by all the opposition that's being caused as a result of this dangerous sabre-rattling. But of course it's easily possible that he wants to provoke WWIII, and all will go forward as initially intended.

When it will go down is anybody's guess. It could be days, weeks, years, or never.

 

I actually got the strange impression last night when I heard some commentary when they were "freaking out" over the U.K. not being on board... about "maybe congress will be sent back to vote on it and vote 'no' and things won't go down".. which made me think for a (few) split seconds that maybe, just maybe, this actually won't go down... because, if no one (other countries) is on board for this and they can tell that 80 or 90% of u.s. citizens are not for this... then maybe it won't happen...
So, that was a nice thought.
Then...the few seconds I had on CNN earlier I got the impression... based on what I heard about how many people (and esp. children) were killed by the chemical weapons (whether or not you believe that is what happened...what they are reporting..) and how "something needs to be done" and "the u.s. WILL go it alone"... just gave me the impression that it was going to happen no matter what... but still no idea on when... but you know, that was hours ago so it would be nice if Obama was backed into some kind of corner and having a hard time being able to do this. (although it's never really stopped him before)...
anyways, I gotta go give C a bath now so I'll check this later and hopefully there will be updates and good discussion and not people arguing back and forth like a bunch of babies and hopefully not shut down.
peace out.

 

Oh oh oh I know the answer to this one, when they give the order.

 

7,692 American Death to Gun Violence or more since Newtown..



figure out why we are killing each other .. before we figure out, why they are killing each other..

 

i read an article about this earlier today, and maybe i'm gullible, but this seemed to make sense to me.

they said that there is, in general, a "norm" for not using chemical weapons in war. so if someone uses them, they need to be punished. so that's why the US should send over a few cruise missiles, to "punish" Assad.
even if it's not going to do shit to harm him (that much), it's like a statement to the world - this is what happens if you use chemical weapons.

i guess i don't really know what i think about that though...

thoughts?

 

I can't see it happening until after September 5th. Then I think it will.

I do not agree that it should but I think they are in a position now of having to make a stand. This is not the first country they have "warned" about weapons and if they do not strike it sends a message that they do not wish to send.

Sad all around.

I really hope I am wrong and that sanity prevails.....but......

 

Oh oh oh I know the answer to this as well.

We are disappointed, disillusioned and pissed off about it.

Disappointed because we can't lean to others to solve our difficulties

Disillusioned because it isn't so

and pissed off because you don't realize it.

It is called bitterness or hardness of heart.

We must condemn to justify the unwillingness to forgive.

What is important about you being right that you have to start the world on fire.

Would you rather be right or safe?

 

Ban Ki-Moon said the UN needs two more weeks. I doubt the US will do anything before that.

 

I wanted to reply to most of the posts since I was last on here but I just picked a few of them....

Brilliant. Don't know why I didn't think of that.

Well, yeah, I know...
That's why in the other thread that got shut down I said something about I don't know why the U.S. has to be the one who takes care of the Syria situation.. that if they really want to do something about ppl killing each other they could look no further than Chicago.

Well, yes, that's all true. And part of the reason this whole thing makes no sense to me (part of the reason!!) is because... they say they don't want to topple the Assad regime- this is not about regime change... the civil war in Syria is going to continue and this "will not be another Iraq" (etc., etc.)- and this is punishment for, basically, violating international law by the use of chemical weapons (a war crime)..
Okay... so my thought to that is- Why does the U.S., in situations like this, just always remind me of someone's father? I mean, the thing is Obama was running his mouth about the "red line" and chemical weapons were (supposedly) used before and the "red line crossed" and the U.S. didn't do anything... so, now it's (supposedly) happened again (and I'm not saying it DIDN'T happen- I'm saying they aren't disclosing a lot of proof on who, what, when, why, how...)---and what it seems to remind me of is... a father told their child that if they keep misbehaving they are putting them in time out as punishment- and then they have to do it, as punishment (and yeah, punishment isn't even some word I came up with...that's the crazy thing... who is one country to PUNISH another country??) because everyone knows that if you're going to tell your child that if they do something they will have consequences (punishment) for that misbehavior- then you have to back up your statement because otherwise you lose respect from the child...that you have to be consistent with parenting...
So, I really could never figure out who gave the United States the right or obligation or whatever you wanna call it... to be the parent to other countries? (get what I'm saying?)

 

yeah, that's a very common question and response to the US acting as world police.

it's an attempt to act in our own country's best interest. that's all it ever is. "we" fought communism in the past because we didn't want it to spread. it wasn't compatible with our economic system.

the simple answer for US involvement now is to prevent the future use of chemical weapons (for our own best interest...and pretty much everyone's in this case). i think the US acts as the father figure because it has enough power to.

but i'd be willing to wager that it's much more complicated than that.
there are possibly other reasons for US involvement. wouldn't be surprised if it were based on money and greed. i don't think it's to help anyone but ourselves. and even then, it may be a shitty attempt.

 

Yeah, I do get the feeling the U.S. acts like the world's police or father figure figure simply because they can..
It's kinda crazy to imagine if some other country would decide they were just going to punish the U.S. for something the government did here and they bombed a few places here--- smh- too crazy of a concept to even think about cause it wouldn't happen...

And yeah, I mean.. I don't know- I know the U.S. wouldn't be doing this if there wasn't something in it for them (them, us, ...however it should be worded)... I highly doubt the government here ever just does something like this just for the greater good and world safety if it's not gonna benefit them/us in some way...
I'm in the process of trying to figure out exactly what they think they are going to get from this though and as of right now I do not know...

 

It usually ends up being a backroom deal that decides these things. Nothing is as it seems, or as it's "reported" in the news.

 

If a strike occurs, it will be either late saturday or next week if you ask me. The UN investigators are scheduled to leave saturday morning. I am hoping Obama has enough sense to not do this. He is alone on this one, other than his (few) confused and blind followers.

 

Who are the followers right now? France still?

And then there is Israel but I wouldn't call that a follower of the U.S. (not getting into Israel again right now in this thread though...)...

Is there anyone else at all???

 

I would love for the United States to sit back and let the rest of the UN figure this one out for once.

 

Never going to happen

 

Yep.

United States= The World's Daddy.

 

The morbidly entranced

 

Here's the problem

More than One-hundred-thousand, including women and children, have already been killed in Syria and no one was doing a thing to stop it. But 1,429 are killed with poison gas and that's now suddenly going to far. Therefore it was some how acceptable killing the other 198,578.

Contrast that with the fact that United States has killed civilians

• 1) by the thousands in Iraq using depleted Uranium. (For all purposes Iraq is a nuclear holocaust) Somehow radiation is acceptable but no poison.

• 2) by the hundreds in Yemen, Pakistan and several other nations with drones.

• 3) thousands again in Afghanistan

• 4) held and tortured civilians without charge or access to due process

• 5) Has no problem detaining heads of state contrary to International law

This conflict is about a pipeline.. pure and simple as that. As of present Russia supplies Europe with 25% of her needs. A pipeline going through the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea in order to supply Europe would break Russia's fuel dominance and ultimately lead back to more profit by mostly American transnational oil companies. (I said 'mostly' because it's mostly United States based oil companies that stand to gain the most from the Syrian conflict)



A clear picture of the imperialism and hypocrisy of the United States develops. Because this conflict is not about anything other than protecting the interests of big oil.

What I don't understand is how given all the above can anyone in their right mind still claim to be a "proud patriot" of any nation. You have to be pretty warped or stoned to take pride in the accomplishments of "your nation".

 

haven't spotted one of those in the thread yet.