PDA

View Full Version : What's the plan for Syria?



LeftCoastPhin
04-15-2003, 02:51 PM
I'm getting burned out with the news. Anyone care to brief me on Syria? What's the latest?

I dont know what to think, I'd prefer not to invade but IMO if they harbor terrorists and Iraqi leaders, why shouldn't we?

Otherwise, what national security did we accomplish by kicking Iraq's ass? The Iraqi leaders could weasle back into power when we leave if we dont flush them out.

I dont quite know what to think on this one......

PhinPhan1227
04-15-2003, 03:14 PM
No way we invade Syria unless we get hard evidence they are supporting terrorists.

LeftCoastPhin
04-15-2003, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by PhinPhan1227
No way we invade Syria unless we get hard evidence they are supporting terrorists.


Yea, that's the side I'm leaning towards. We cant get carried away otherwise the world will be even more against us, especially the Arab world.


So is the only news this: Bush: Syria, dont help Iraq or else.

Syria: Or else what? We are doing nothing wrong.


I like GW, but his threats have a way of backing us into a corner.

themole
04-15-2003, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by LeftCoastPhin
I'm getting burned out with the news. Anyone care to brief me on Syria? What's the latest?

I dont know what to think, I'd prefer not to invade but IMO if they harbor terrorists and Iraqi leaders, why shouldn't we?

Otherwise, what national security did we accomplish by kicking Iraq's ass? The Iraqi leaders could weasle back into power when we leave if we dont flush them out.

I dont quite know what to think on this one......

LCP...remember...we don't have our hands on the Iraqi leadership that fled the "area". Syria was named one of the axes of "evil". I believe W. is fireing one across their bow to see how they react. We shurely seemed to have gotten N. Koreas attention.

LeftCoastPhin
04-15-2003, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by themole
We shurely seemed to have gotten N. Koreas attention.


How so? I haven't heard. Are they wanting to play nicely with others now?

themole
04-15-2003, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by LeftCoastPhin
How so? I haven't heard. Are they wanting to play nicely with others now?

I don't know about "others" but they are softening their stance on the negotiations. They wanted "one on ones" with the U.S. and we wouldn't hear of it. That's what their sabre rattleing was all about.

LeftCoastPhin
04-15-2003, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by themole
I don't know about "others" but they are softening their stance on the negotiations. They wanted "one on ones" with the U.S. and we wouldn't hear of it. That's what their sabre rattleing was all about.


One on one? What's that? Do they mean they want to match us Nuke for Nuke?

themole
04-15-2003, 04:00 PM
Originally posted by LeftCoastPhin
One on one? What's that? Do they mean they want to match us Nuke for Nuke?


:jawdrop: :nono:... I'm not up to speed on just what the negotiations are about "I believe nuclear testing"...but they have been insisting on speaking only with the U.S. in them and we have other parties involved that they don't want participating. Or...maybe if we talk one on one with them it will automatically give them an undeserved world status. This was being covered quite a bit before the war started but died down after we went into Iraq.

PhinPhan1227
04-15-2003, 04:26 PM
Their "one on one" meetings were nothing but attempted extortion. We didn't bite, and they've shut up somewhat since we started truly rolling across Iraq. They blustered thinking we'd pay them off to keep them quiet while we were "bogged down" in Iraq. Since we didn't get too bogged, I don't think they are prepared to risk bringing our full attention down on them.

themole
04-15-2003, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by PhinPhan1227
Their "one on one" meetings were nothing but attempted extortion. We didn't bite, and they've shut up somewhat since we started truly rolling across Iraq. They blustered thinking we'd pay them off to keep them quiet while we were "bogged down" in Iraq. Since we didn't get too bogged, I don't think they are prepared to risk bringing our full attention down on them.

1227...I f you are up to speed on this topic...tell me how far off I was on it. I think I may have included something I heard on China also.

PhinPhan1227
04-15-2003, 04:50 PM
You weren't off at all concerning what they were looking for. But what never got emphasised was the big picture. N Korea tried to extort money/concessions from us, and thought they'd be able to get away with it while we were busy with Iraq. Plain and simple, it looks like GW called their bluff.

themole
04-15-2003, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by PhinPhan1227
You weren't off at all concerning what they were looking for. But what never got emphasised was the big picture. N Korea tried to extort money/concessions from us, and thought they'd be able to get away with it while we were busy with Iraq. Plain and simple, it looks like GW called their bluff.

:D... W...ain't playen games!!! That has them baffled.

iceblizzard69
04-15-2003, 07:13 PM
The USA won't invade Syria. If you thought the world's reaction to an invasion of Iraq was bad, wait until you see the world's reaction to an invasion os Syria. I doubt a single nation would ever support a Syrian invasion, I supported the war on Iraq, but we can't just go around and invade every nation on earth that isn't a democracy. I don't like Syria, but I don't think we will invade them.

themole
04-15-2003, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by iceblizzard69
The USA won't invade Syria. If you thought the world's reaction to an invasion of Iraq was bad, wait until you see the world's reaction to an invasion os Syria. I doubt a single nation would ever support a Syrian invasion, I supported the war on Iraq, but we can't just go around and invade every nation on earth that isn't a democracy. I don't like Syria, but I don't think we will invade them.

:lol: Some said... the USA will never invade Iraq! Guess what! The USA has declared war on International Terrorism and vowed to hunt it down and kill it where ever it can be found. You need to understand... this nation historicaly DOES NOT "sabre rattle". The President has just fired one over Syrias bow to get their attention. If he doesn't get the desired results...INVADING Syria.. will not be out of the question depending on the intel they get.

Barbarian
04-16-2003, 02:45 AM
Personally, I think (hope) we will spend quite a bit of time trying diplomacy with Syria before we go stomping into Damascus. I think we have let the world know we mean buisiness and will use that "motivation" to... "encourage" some countries into playing ball.

I doubt it will come down to an invasion, but some harsh words will definately be shot back and forth.

PhinPhan1227
04-16-2003, 09:31 AM
Again, if we were to even SUGGEST invading Syria, you'd have to see ties to terrorism like those seen in Afghanistan. Even if Syrai just pays lip service to fighting terrorism, we'd never be able to justify an invasion there. I wouldn't support an invasion without ironclad proof.

iceblizzard69
04-16-2003, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by Barbarian
Personally, I think (hope) we will spend quite a bit of time trying diplomacy with Syria before we go stomping into Damascus. I think we have let the world know we mean buisiness and will use that "motivation" to... "encourage" some countries into playing ball.


I think we should definitely use diplomacy with Syria, espicially since we are using it with North Korea. I personally would support an invasion of NK before I would support one of Syria. If we use diplomacy with North Korea, then we have to do the same with Syria.

PhinPhan1227
04-16-2003, 10:33 AM
No WAY I'd support an invasion of N. Korea under almost ANY circumstances. That's a country with a populace that wildly supports their leader, and has terrain which is a murder trap for an invading army. If it comes to conflict with N. Korea, we'll be flattening it with airpower. Those people may be suffering, but they are also supportive of their regime, unlike Iraq. Iraq was a nation of mostly innocent civilians, N. Korea is not.

iceblizzard69
04-16-2003, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by PhinPhan1227
No WAY I'd support an invasion of N. Korea under almost ANY circumstances. That's a country with a populace that wildly supports their leader, and has terrain which is a murder trap for an invading army. If it comes to conflict with N. Korea, we'll be flattening it with airpower. Those people may be suffering, but they are also supportive of their regime, unlike Iraq. Iraq was a nation of mostly innocent civilians, N. Korea is not.


That is a very good point, and hopefully an invasion with NK won't be necessary because diplomacy will work.

upstart
04-30-2003, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by LeftCoastPhin
I'm getting burned out with the news. Anyone care to brief me on Syria? What's the latest?

I dont know what to think, I'd prefer not to invade but IMO if they harbor terrorists and Iraqi leaders, why shouldn't we?

Otherwise, what national security did we accomplish by kicking Iraq's ass? The Iraqi leaders could weasle back into power when we leave if we dont flush them out.

I dont quite know what to think on this one......

The Plan for Syria....Rapid Dominance Achieved by
SHOCK and AWE :fire: