Syria, what should America do?

[themadscientist]

This situation is not getting as much air time as I think it warrants. I'm not 100% sure I am for getting involved. I think no matter what we do, we look bad to many in the region. I'm tired of American soldiers bleeding for others, many who won't appreciate, or might actually hate us for it. It's so complex I don't think there is a right answer, just degrees of wrong answers.

[Ace2cool]

I disagree with any involvement over there. Egypt, Syria, anything. The only exception is if Israel legitimately needs our help, but I'm 90% sure they can handle Syria.

I fully believe that this is gonna be just like the Iraq war. We're going in based on fabricated claims, as far as I can tell. There's no concrete evidence of chemical weapons having been used, and that's the whole basis of involvement. And arming the rebels? Yeah, I can see that working out very well, considering most of them hate the US as well.

[WDRacing]

We should stay the F out of there. We can't always be the world police and we've been at war since 1991.

The Middle East is going to be savage forever, nothing anyone can do about it. Way too many conflicting religions over there for any sort of long term peace. Hell I can't even remember a short term peace.

The world is overpopulated. Let them kill each other off and have God sort out the mess on his end.

[mattblancarte]

We should stay the F out of there. We can't always be the world police and we've been at war since 1991.

I agree.

But if we don't play world police, then how will we maintain our stranglehold on OPEC?

[WDRacing]

War would be different if we went to war with the mindset of rolling in, kicking the hell out of the enemy and leaving. But we don't. Our ROE are always hindering us from completing the task. War should be recognized as atrocious before we deploy. Civilians will be killed in the process.

If you don't have the will to bring war, don't bring it at all. Anything less than thorough destruction of ones enemies isn't acceptable. That's war. We don't have the will for it. We have too many politicians interfering. This does nothing but increase the duration and the amount of friendly casualties.

Unless you're prepared to fully commit, stay home.

With that said, what the hell would we do in Syria? I could see enforcing a no fly zone. But to what end?

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

On a related note, http://labs.umbrella.com/2013/05/07/bre ... -internet/

[mattblancarte]

With that said, what the hell would we do in Syria? I could see enforcing a no fly zone. But to what end?

By destabilizing the region (aiding rebels with arms, resources, etc.), we give ourselves a foothold in shaping the political future, good or bad.

[ImStricken06]

I disagree with any involvement over there. Egypt, Syria, anything. The only exception is if Israel legitimately needs our help, but I'm 90% sure they can handle Syria.

couldnt have said it better myself.

[ImStricken06]

With that said, what the hell would we do in Syria? I could see enforcing a no fly zone. But to what end?

By destabilizing the region (aiding rebels with arms, resources, etc.), we give ourselves a foothold in shaping the political future, good or bad.

you do realize the middle east is a giant pool of archaic, brainwashed, lunatics right? so what "political future" are you talking about? they will still be stoning women as "justice" when we have flying cars in 50 years from now. we need to stay out. let the bastards sort out their own mess. we have enough on our hands.

[mattblancarte]

you do realize the middle east is a giant pool of archaic, brainwashed, lunatics right? so what "political future" are you talking about? they will still be stoning women as "justice" when we have flying cars in 50 years from now. we need to stay out. let the bastards sort out their own mess. we have enough on our hands.

Yes, very aware of their social problems and incompatibility with western society. But what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Or, more succinctly, what does that have to do with the value of the US Dollar?

I was simply commenting on our economic motivations for intervention, which we do have a-plenty. We aren't there to bring peace, justice, or stability to the region. We are there to protect our place in the global economy.

so what "political future" are you talking about?

That's a good question. Throughout the second half of the 20th century and continuing to today, the United States has been very focused on gaining a stranglehold on all OPEC nations. Often, we do this through subversive tactics carried out by our intelligence community.

As long as oil is being traded with the US Dollar, it's imperative that we maintain strong political relationships with nations involved in oil trade. Pretty straightforward (although oversimplified).

Thus, we will continue to stick our fingers in the business of each and every nation that potentially threatens our economy.

let the bastards sort out their own mess. we have enough on our hands.

I wish it were that simple. It's definitely the idealist point of view, which I can sympathize with.

[ImStricken06]

I was simply commenting on our economic motivations for intervention, which we do have a-plenty. We aren't there to bring peace, justice, or stability to the region. We are there to protect our place in the global economy.

nothing we will do in syria will protect nor defame our place in the global economy. frankly getting involved in another war will weaken our defenses, deplete our resources even more, and place a larger tax burden upon our citizens.

As long as oil is being traded with the US Dollar, it's imperative that we maintain strong political relationships with nations involved in oil trade.

them using our dollar for trade, is to their advantage not ours. them using our dollar as form of payment isnt because of our political relationships. the dollar has always been the most reliable form of payment. while other countries bounced around from rubles, to euro's to dollars - USA still stood strong with our dollar.

[mattblancarte]

nothing we will do in syria will protect nor defame our place in the global economy.

If you read back to my earlier posts, I never suggested we do anything. I was acknowledging that there are legitimate arguments to be made for intervention.

Being involved at "arms-length" (double-entendre) allows us to show force and ownership. Remember why we engaged in Desert Storm? Iraq went after our oil money.

frankly getting involved in another war will weaken our defenses

You'll have to elaborate on this one for me. I honestly can't think of any major loss or weakening of the US Armed Forces since Vietnam. You might be underestimating the global readiness of our military...

Wars and conflicts come in all shapes and sizes. A Syrian conflict would not require major resources to show force on behalf of Israel.

them using our dollar for trade, is to their advantage not ours. them using our dollar as form of payment isnt because of our political relationships. the dollar has always been the most reliable form of payment. while other countries bounced around from rubles, to euro's to dollars - USA still stood strong with our dollar.

Hmmm... I would have to disagree with you. Please see the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrocurrency

Since the agreements of 1971 and 1973, OPEC oil is exclusively quoted in US dollars. This created a permanent demand for dollars on the international exchange markets.[2][3] As of 2005, OPEC continues to trade in US Dollars, but some OPEC members (such as Iran and Venezuela) have been pushing for a switch to the euro.

We don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons because we cannot economically control nuclear-armed countries. Consider the following:

Since the beginning of 2003, Iran has required euro in payment of exports toward Asia and Europe. The government opened an Iranian Oil Bourse on the free trade zone on the island of Kish,[4][5] for the express purpose of trading oil priced in other currencies, including euros.

Iran is trying to wean OPEC off of the US dollar, and they will have nuclear weapons to defend their actions. We don't like that.

[mattblancarte]

When it comes to wars and politics, the first question you should ask is:

"Who is making money here?"