Air Strikes in Syria Against ISIS; Good Idea or Not?

Boss 302

Boss 302

Pursuit Driver
It appears Obama is prepared to use military air strikes against ISIS in Syria and arm the more moderate rebels there. Assad has warned the US not to conduct air strikes in his country without his permission.

Syria at one time had a very good air defense system Russia helped provide to defend the country from Israeli air attacks. It's not known what condition that air defense system is in since the civil war broke out there. Their air force was one of the largest in the Middle East, but there are reports many of their pilots have deserted since the civil war and maintenance for their air craft may also have suffered.

Russia is supporting Assad. What will be their response if the US conducts air strikes in Syria against Assad's wishes? On top of this, is it a good idea to arm moderate rebels there?

Do we really want to help rebels remove Assad, especially when indications show the rebels may want an Islamic state? Would that not contribute to more danger for Israel and create an even more unstable powder keg in the region?
 
Here's something to watch. The Democrats now state how wrong we were to invade Iraq. Remember they were for it before they were against it. They claim if we hadn't invaded Iraq, the region would be more stable because much of the region was afraid of Saddam. Syria was an ally of Iraq under Saddam. What has Iran done since Saddam was removed from power that they hadn't done while he was in power?

What the Democrats will argue is ISIS wouldn't exist if we hadn't invaded Iraq. How in the heck can they say that; especially since it has been proven Al-Qaeda in Iraq existed prior to the invasion? It was originally formed as Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 1999. Not long after the invasion, they became known as Al-Qaeda in Iraq and now as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

If you go by what the Democrats began saying after they turned against the war in Iraq, you would think they would be in opposition to air strikes in Syria when the Syrian president has stated opposition to it.

Though I don't think Assad is good for Syria, I believe it becoming a true Islamic state would be worse for the region. I think we can control Assad. My thought is we tell Assad we will help quell the rebellion in his country by helping to take out ISIS, but he's going to have to make some changes in how he governs.

Russia has aligned itself with Assad. We open a big can of worms once we begin making air strikes agains ISIS in Syria without Syria's permission.
 
I don't support doing anything half-assed. As far as Russia goes, I firmly believe they have a bigger mouth than...ah.....orbs.

If you're gonna do it, do it and do it all the way, or just continue to take pot shots at them over Iraq.
 
Whao Nellie, somebody back up the truck. I thought Assad was suppose to be gone by now anyway, at least that's what O promised a while back ago. Oh that's right, he never did anything about him...it was just empty talk. I tend to agree that bombing into Syria would only risk increased instability within the region. Add to that the Russian's backing Syria and it increases it even more, and into other regions. While Russia may be more bite than bark they are more capable of causing harm here at home and in key locations abroad. They are a real threat with a leader who is determined to bring back their glory days. I also agree that if we do proceed that it must be done all-in but I'm not convinced that will happen. With no defined end-game and the unlikelihood that it would put an end to ISIS, I believe the risks far outweigh any perceived benefit.
 
Boss 302 said:
It appears Obama is prepared to use military air strikes against ISIS in Syria and arm the more moderate rebels there. Assad has warned the US not to conduct air strikes in his country without his permission.

Syria at one time had a very good air defense system Russia helped provide to defend the country from Israeli air attacks. It's not known what condition that air defense system is in since the civil war broke out there. Their air force was one of the largest in the Middle East, but there are reports many of their pilots have deserted since the civil war and maintenance for their air craft may also have suffered.

Russia is supporting Assad. What will be their response if the US conducts air strikes in Syria against Assad's wishes? On top of this, is it a good idea to arm moderate rebels there?

Do we really want to help rebels remove Assad, especially when indications show the rebels may want an Islamic state? Would that not contribute to more danger for Israel and create an even more unstable powder keg in the region?
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Russia going into Ukraine? Isn't this ironic, that they will support Assad against air strikes, yet do as they wish with Ukraine? Or am I being blonde and missing something?

I'll read up on the rest, before I join the discussion.
 
deewee said:
Boss 302 said:
It appears Obama is prepared to use military air strikes against ISIS in Syria and arm the more moderate rebels there. Assad has warned the US not to conduct air strikes in his country without his permission.

Syria at one time had a very good air defense system Russia helped provide to defend the country from Israeli air attacks. It's not known what condition that air defense system is in since the civil war broke out there. Their air force was one of the largest in the Middle East, but there are reports many of their pilots have deserted since the civil war and maintenance for their air craft may also have suffered.

Russia is supporting Assad. What will be their response if the US conducts air strikes in Syria against Assad's wishes? On top of this, is it a good idea to arm moderate rebels there?

Do we really want to help rebels remove Assad, especially when indications show the rebels may want an Islamic state? Would that not contribute to more danger for Israel and create an even more unstable powder keg in the region?
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Russia going into Ukraine? Isn't this ironic, that they will support Assad against air strikes, yet do as they wish with Ukraine? Or am I being blonde and missing something?

I'll read up on the rest, before I join the discussion.
Click to expand...

Russia wants Ukraine because of the sea ports give them access to ship natural gas more cheaply throughout Europe. Russia wants Assad to remain in power because Qatar wants to run a pipeline for natural gas to ports in Syria so they can ship natural gas to Europe more quickly than they can now and for much less. Assad will not let Qatar run the pipeline through Syria because it has allied itself with Russia.

You also have Saudi Arabia who wants to run an oil pipeline to Syrian ports so it can ship its oil out more quickly while saving a ton of money doing so. One thing that concerns the Saudis is all it's oil has to be shipped via the Persian Gulf and is vulnerable to Iranian naval ships and military aircraft. They're very much afraid of Iran.

Now look at the reasons most wars start.
 
Obama has wanted to invade Syria for months. This is just an excuse to do so.

In a related item, it is being reported that Syrian Rebel "moderates" were the ones who actually kidnapped Steven Sotloff and others, and then sold them to ISIS for between $25,000 and $50,000.
They did so by setting up a checkpoint within Syria, and upon finding the Americans going through, they decided that they would be worth something. These are the people that Obama wants to support.
 
lotstodo said:
Obama has wanted to invade Syria for months. This is just an excuse to do so.

In a related item, it is being reported that Syrian Rebel "moderates" were the ones who actually kidnapped Steven Sotloff and others, and then sold them to ISIS for between $25,000 and $50,000.
They did so by setting up a checkpoint within Syria, and upon finding the Americans going through, they decided that they would be worth something. These are the people that Obama wants to support.
Click to expand...
Ok, now that makes me sick. Really sick.
 
lotstodo said:
Obama has wanted to invade Syria for months. This is just an excuse to do so.

In a related item, it is being reported that Syrian Rebel "moderates" were the ones who actually kidnapped Steven Sotloff and others, and then sold them to ISIS for between $25,000 and $50,000.
They did so by setting up a checkpoint within Syria, and upon finding the Americans going through, they decided that they would be worth something. These are the people that Obama wants to support.
Click to expand...

He wanted to attack Syria as soon it was discovered chemical weapons had been used. He assumed Assad's forces used the chemical weapons. Putin quickly stepped in and got Assad to agree to turn over his chemical weapons to an international group. As you know, it was also discovered it was ISIS who used the weapons.

I say the best policy for the US if we're determined to take the fight against ISIS in Syria is to do it with Assad's permission. If we do it without permission, it will be seen as ignoring Syria's sovereignty by other countries and could provoke reprisals. It would be a good excuse for Assad to ask Russia for military assistance, which they would in a heartbeat.
 
We'll we find out tonight at 9pm what the grand plan is, or at least what the big man wants us to know about the big plan.
 
honeybunny said:
Anyone care to join me ? ? ?


http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/10/obama-isis-speech-drinking-game/


:drunkdiva
Click to expand...
"My Military" has always creeped me out more than just a little.
 
honeybunny said:
Anyone care to join me ? ? ?


http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/10/obama-isis-speech-drinking-game/


:drunkdiva
Click to expand...

People would get drunk for taking a drink every time he says, "I."
 
Well that was a non-event. It happened but did anything really happen? He lived up to expectations anyway...nothing substantial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top