Obama's air strike plans in disarray after Britain rejects use of force in Syria

[RJKarl]

Russia is not going to anything unless we attack them.

 

[leftcoastdeac]

Yes, I do.

Russia likes selling arms to Syria but they're not going to get in a shooting war with the US for Assad.

This. Russia is moving ships into the region as a show of support for Assad, but not a show of force. They are sending an anti-sub boat, and a guided missile carrier of their own. I'm not sure what, if anything else they have in the region, but I'm having trouble finding any information on what else may be there except for maybe some amphibious assault vessels - hardly a threat to the fleet we have there by themselves.

On the other side, we've got 4 guided missile warships (capable of hitting Naval targets) in the area with a fifth on the way, and 2 carriers not far away.

Again, Russia is sending ships as a show of support. You might consider a show of force, but at the end of the day, with the firepower we have in the region, those ships won't do anything but find themselves having a bad day if they go after us.

This is turning into a complete shit show.

 

[DeaconSig]

I'm not advocating us putting a single troop in Syria.

If we don't do anything, whomever is in charge of Syria has the green light to chemical weapons to take over Lebanon again or to strike Israel or for Iran to use any way they so choose.

The reality is if we do nothing the chemical weapons ban is de facto dead.

RJ this morning.

This thread is disgusting on a number of levels and is the latest in a series of threads that show the Politics Board has outlived its usefulness.

Somebody should be raining holy hell on anyone cowardly enough to use poison gas on children.

Jhmd last Friday.

Does the fact that RJ and jh agree with each other mean the apocalypse is upon us?

And how do we factor in that they both agree with that fuckface 89deaconmike?

 

[jhmd2000]

RJ this morning.



Jhmd last Friday.

Does the fact that RJ and jh agree with each other mean the apocalypse is upon us?

And how do we factor in that they both agree with that fuckface 89deaconmike?

When are you guys going to finally figure out that RJ and I are the OGB version of the Phil Hendrie Show?

 

[PhillyDeac]

Russia is not going to anything unless we attack them.

Attack who? Russia? Or attack Seria?

 

[ThinkingWithMyDeac]

Attack who? Russia? Or attack Seria?

I wonder if on a message board somewhere in Russia RJKaramovich is typing out the same defense and reasoning for their ideas. We Russia told the United States not to attack Syria and that we were dealing with the problem and to show restraint. If they attack Syria we must attack them because if we don't then all the other countries we tell not to do anything will defy us since our words will have no meaning.

 

[Deacon923]

If it's OK to use them NK, Iran and Syria would certainly think about selling them.

to who? These are the only countries in the world who have not ratified the CWC banning chemical weapons:

Israel 13/01/1993
2 Myanmar 14/01/1993
States that have neither signed nor acceded to the Chemical Weapons Convention
No. State
1 Angola
2 Egypt
3 North Korea
4 South Sudan
5 Syria

The only potential customers are Angola and Egypt since South Sudan has a lower net worth than some people on this board.

 

[BillBrasky]

RJ is a regular Henry Clay

 

[RJKarl]

Another possible target could be Syria's oil refineries. This is how they pay for their arms.

 

[WFU71]

Another possible target could be Syria's oil refineries. This is how they pay for their arms.

Yeah, our gas prices would go out of sight and tank the economy - that would sure show those Syrians who's boss.

 

[ConnorEl]

Sure sounds like we're going to do something. This guy (Aaron David Miller) explains why he thinks we will and why we've really no good options.

So the logic is that we're not going in for regime change or to tip the balance of the civil war. But primarily to disable/discourage the future use of chemical weapons. That's the limited goal.

 

[OGBDeacon07]

Good thread.

Would read again.

 

[RJKarl]

Yeah, our gas prices would go out of sight and tank the economy - that would sure show those Syrians who's boss.

That's as crazy as 07's rep statement that this is just a cover to start a military engagement there.

Syria make a whole $15M/day from it's oil refineries. That's not even a pimple on the world oil supply. Garbage speculators have far more impact than Syria.

 

[OGBDeacon07]

This is about a LNG (Liquified Natural Gas) pipeline that will supply Europe.

Get with the program.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/201285133440424621.html

 

[RJKarl]

We are not going to send troops. To think is a conspiracy to get us to do that is conspiracy theory gone mad.

 

[OGBDeacon07]

We are not going to send troops. To think is a conspiracy to get us to do that is conspiracy theory gone mad.

Did you click the link?

 

[Deadbolt]

CNN (as credible as they are) saying an attack is not imminent.

 

[WFU71]

That's as crazy as 07's rep statement that this is just a cover to start a military engagement there.

Syria make a whole $15M/day from it's oil refineries. That's not even a pimple on the world oil supply. Garbage speculators have far more impact than Syria.

OK, then how is bombing their refineries going to cripple Syria's ability to pay for their arms?

 

[Deadbolt]

Obama not going forward without Congress.

 

[OGBDeacon07]

Obama not going forward without Congress.

Except that he "believes he has the authority to intervene in Syria without Congressional approve."

This guy makes Slick Willy look like an amateur.