What's new
By:

Will there be American invasion in Syria?

even though i'm generally not for going to war for reasons other than being attacked or stopping a third reich type behemoth, the fact that supporting the rebels who hate the west as much as any other nutjob group really makes me totally disapprove a war in Syria.

Sent from my SGH-T679 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
dalamon said:
No surprise seeing Albania and Kosovo on this list
Click to expand...

It appears that Spain and Germany are giving vocal support to the US but want no part in a military strike. The EU just condemned the Syria chemical wepaons attack and stated all evidence points to the Syrian government. However, they want to wait till the UN report comes in this week before deciding on a course of action.

Germany has indicated that if the EU, NATO (who has condemned the attack) or the UN authorizes military action that they will support it.
 
So, lets not invade Syria. Lets get those nine countries to go do it. I'm done putting our boys and girls into the fight whenever something happens. Why can't someone else step up for once?
 
ElRoach0 said:
So, lets not invade Syria. Lets get those nine countries to go do it. I'm done putting our boys and girls into the fight whenever something happens. Why can't someone else step up for once?
Click to expand...

No one will. That is not justification for it always being America though.
 
ElRoach0 said:
So, lets not invade Syria. Lets get those nine countries to go do it. I'm done putting our boys and girls into the fight whenever something happens. Why can't someone else step up for once?
Click to expand...

Because we send something like 45% of the world total military expenditures, and some 10(?) times the amount on the next country.
 
Vermin said:
This is war to keep the petrol dollar the standard. Nothing more. Without it....your life savings is worth a gallon of milk.
Click to expand...

Good thing I sunk my life savings into a dairy farm then.

No, really. I don't care if I'm the jerk here, but unless the UN pledges it's full support, I don't want even a single dollar spent on action. By moving without UN support, we're wasting money and lives all to feed the stereotype of of Team America: World Police.

Would we show the world that chemical weapons will not be tolerated? Yes. But without full military backing from a plethora of nations, it only demonstrates that there's "that one guy" that'll back up his words. The world needs more than that one guy.
 
ElRoach0 said:
Good thing I sunk my life savings into a dairy farm then.

No, really. I don't care if I'm the jerk here, but unless the UN pledges it's full support, I don't want even a single dollar spent on action. By moving without UN support, we're wasting money and lives all to feed the stereotype of of Team America: World Police.

Would we show the world that chemical weapons will not be tolerated? Yes. But without full military backing from a plethora of nations, it only demonstrates that there's "that one guy" that'll back up his words. The world needs more than that one guy.
Click to expand...

Then nothing will ever get done on anything.Iran, Israel/Palestine, Syria, Rawanda... There is always at least one country with a hidden agenda.

The UN is a joke.
 
Russia just came out and said that it will pressure Assad to give up all his chemical weapons to the international community. Now the State Dept is trying to walk back Kerry's statement. Oops...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top