What would you do in Syria

[*bfine32*]

Quite a bit of Sabre Rattling coming from the WH over the latest attacks by Assad and I'm sure we can all agree it is a mess. You have ISIS fighting Assad, Assad fighting back and not caring who gets in the way. You have the US helping clear Raqqa and every move they make against ISIS makes Assad that much stronger. There are a few options and I know many here don't like boots on the ground.

I'd be curious to think what folks think we should do.

[Bengalzona]

This should have been taken care of during the Obama Administration. We should have sat down with representatives of the Assad government and the non-ISIS rebels, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Turkey and representatives from the EU (all interested parties but ISIS) and hammered out an agreement.

But the time for that is past. We refuse to talk to Iran, one of Assad's buddies. Our relations with Russia is now stretched due to the Ukraine sanctions and their meddling in elections. The Turkish government has now transitioned from a liberal secular government to a conservative Muslim government which has doubled down on their anti-Kurd stance. Basically, we have no real strings to pull with parties that can influence things there. Sending ground forces isn't really an option (it is very possible they would get bombed by the Russians). All we can really do now is bomb ISIS and watch as the Assad government retakes the country with Russia's help.

Big win for Russia and Assad.

[NATI BENGALS]

Can it get worse than a genocidal dictator (ISIS is already there, so I know that)?

Step 1 assassinate Assad.
Step 2 see who fills the void.
Step 3 reevaluate the situation.

[*bfine32*]

(04-06-2017, 09:00 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: This should have been taken care of during the Obama Administration. We should have sat down with  representatives of the Assad government and the non-ISIS rebels, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Turkey and representatives from the EU (all interested parties by ISIS) and hammered out an agreement.

But the time for that is past. We refuse to talk to Iran, one of Assad's buddies. Our relations with Russia is now stretched due to the Ukraine sanctions and their meddling in elections. The Turkish government has now transitioned from a liberal secular government to a conservative Muslim government which has doubled down on their anti-Kurd stance. Basically, we have no real strings to pull with parties that can influence things there. Sending ground forces isn't really an option (it is very possible they would get bombed by the Russians). All we can really do now is bomb ISIS and watch as the Assad government retakes the country with Russia's help.

Big win for Russia and Assad.

Good view Zona, as always. I too believe Obama administration dropped the ball. Agreeing to let Russia oversee their elimination of Chemical Weapons was putting the fox in charge of the hen house. But that's water under the bridge.

Perhaps we could talk to leaders of ISIS and Assad. Then see who will give us the most of what we want

[*bfine32*]

(04-06-2017, 09:09 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Can it get worse than a genocidal dictator (ISIS is already there, so I know that)?

Step 1 assassinate Assad.
Step 2 see who fills the void.
Step 3 reevaluate the situation.

This is generally what we did in Iraq. Many think we are worse off without him in charge there

[NATI BENGALS]

(04-06-2017, 09:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This is generally what we did in Iraq. Many think we are worse off without him in charge there

We tried nation building there and kept a large visible force that could be blamed for a lot of the problems. 

I'm saying send in a Putin-esque assassin that takes out Assad and won't be traced back to us. 

Maintain a minimal presence and mainly provide humanitarian aid.  

[*bfine32*]

(04-06-2017, 09:37 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: We tried nation building there and kept a large visible force that could be blamed for a lot of the problems. 

I'm saying send in a Putin-esque assassin that takes out Assad and won't be traced back to us. 

Maintain a minimal presence and mainly provide humanitarian aid.  

Interesting.I guess we wouldn't have to worry about a terrorist organization coming in and filling the void; as they are already there. 

[HarleyDog]

(04-06-2017, 08:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Quite a bit of Sabre Rattling coming from the WH over the latest attacks by Assad and I'm sure we can all agree it is a mess. You have ISIS fighting Assad, Assad fighting back and not caring who gets in the way. You have the US helping clear Raqqa and every move they make against ISIS makes Assad that much stronger. There are a few options and I know many here don't like boots on the ground.

I'd be curious to think what folks think we should do.

We have to be careful. I read today on MSN where US Generals think we are not ready for a soviet nuclear attack. I know that sounds a little questionable because I read it through a news feed, and I'm sure the US would like them to think we are not ready. However in doing that I cant see the logic of publically admitting we are not ready, nor using that as a tactic to make them think we are not ready. Very dumb with our news people even publishing such an article. Sometimes the press is our worst enemy.

With that said, I think shit is about to get really hot and it's not going to be Trumps fault. Yet, he's probably the best person to have right now as I think he will listen to the generals and their suggestions instead of doing Obama crap and letting our enemies build beyond our means. We are not only looking at ISIS right now but also the turmoil in Korea. If US troops in Korea are drawn into conflict, the US is drawn full board.

Lot's of end of times tension happening across the globe with the US apt to be drawn in regardless. Not going to be good for anyone.

[GMDino]

Whelp...doesn't matter now.

After a long consideration Trump has ordered a military strike...

[HarleyDog]

(04-06-2017, 10:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: Whelp...doesn't matter now.

After a long consideration Trump has ordered a military strike...

Yep. Didn't see that coming at all. Let's see if we all wake up tomorrow.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Too late, 42 Tomahawk Missles strike two sites in Syria.

EDIT: Can only expect escalation from this point if Putin wants war, to bring back the Russian Empire of the Cold War or even expand it.

[NATI BENGALS]

(04-06-2017, 09:50 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: We have to be careful. I read today on MSN where US Generals think we are not ready for a soviet nuclear attack. I know that sounds a little questionable because I read it through a news feed, and I'm sure the US would like them to think we are not ready. However in doing that I cant see the logic of publically admitting we are not ready, nor using that as a tactic to make them think we are not ready. Very dumb with our news people even publishing such an article. Sometimes the press is our worst enemy.

With that said, I think shit is about to get really hot and it's not going to be Trumps fault. Yet, he's probably the best person to have right now as I think he will listen to the generals and their suggestions instead of doing Obama crap and letting our enemies build beyond our means. We are not only looking at ISIS right now but also the turmoil in Korea. If US troops in Korea are drawn into conflict, the US is drawn full board.

Lot's of end of times tension happening across the globe with the US apt to be drawn in regardless. Not going to be good for anyone.

I don't think Putin is dumb enough to do that. Unless Trump told them where all of our subs and nuclear warheads are I don't think they would ever initiate an attack knowing we have Trident missiles around the world ready to go. They know we would ruin the earth with a retaliation. 

However the crazy fat kid in North Korea probably thinks it makes him the king of the world if he can hit America with a nuke. 

[GMDino]

(04-06-2017, 10:21 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Yep. Didn't see that coming at all. Let's see if we all wake up tomorrow.

Eh, he got Putin's approval first.  Probably why he took so long.  

[6andcounting]

Now that Obama is no longer President, does "limited air strike with no boots on the ground" go back to being war again, or are will still pretending they are two different things?

[GMDino]

(04-06-2017, 10:24 PM)6andcounting Wrote: Now that Obama is no longer President, does "limited air strike with no boots on the ground" go back to being war again, or are will still pretending they are two different things?

Don't know what Trump will call it.  He probably called playing with his little green army men "war".

[*bfine32*]

(04-06-2017, 10:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: Eh, he got Putin's approval first.  Probably why he took so long.  

No he didn't. Russia is not pleased. 

[NATI BENGALS]

Well.... Looks like I'm drinking tonight.

[*bfine32*]

(04-06-2017, 10:32 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Well.... Looks like I'm drinking tonight.

I just hope the rest of the west backs up thier talk with action.

[GMDino]

50 missiles launched at one airbase with two runways?

Hope the Russians weren't there.

[*bfine32*]

(04-06-2017, 10:21 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Too late, 42 Tomahawk Missles strike two sites in Syria.

EDIT: Can only expect escalation from this point if Putin wants war, to bring back the Russian Empire of the Cold War or even expand it.

Glad that Trump chimed in on my Thread.