What Mideast Crisis? Israelis Have Moved On

[sirs]

No, it wasn't the purpose, merely a preferred localized shooting gallery there, than spread all over, especially here.......that is what was happening, whether it was on purpose or merely as a result of the war

[Plane]

This what you said, "What keeps Isreal from bolstering whichever side grows weak? Each in turn, preventing a victoryand preventing a defeat."

I replied that that is as delusional as the idea that you put forth during the Iraq War. That idea being that the US was purposely creating a barrel in Iraq to shoot al Qaeda fish in.


BSB

Just as much as I do not know that this was the case, I do not know that it isn't.

Do I beleive that ruthlessness happens?

Yes , just as often as stupid does.

Either way battles that cost us what we can spare and cost the enemy what he cannot spare are better for us than the reverse.

Does our leadership think strategicly, or just react?

I expect not to ever know the whole truth , which is most likely a mix of strategy and stupidity.

[BSB]

"Just as much as I do not know that this was the case, I do not know that it isn't."

Well, apparently you're unaware that that's your choice. Why you feel more comfortable with that choice I wouldn't, and couldn't, venture. 

BSB

[Plane]

"Just as much as I do not know that this was the case, I do not know that it isn't."

Well, apparently you're unaware that that's your choice. Why you feel more comfortable with that choice I wouldn't, and couldn't, venture. 

BSB

No , I am not willfully ignorant.

I just can't know everything.

I think I can speak of what is possible , without having to produce evidence , because the possibility doesn't require evidence as proof of reality would.

Proof that things are one way or the other could show up, and I would adjust , but before that happens I am able only to speculate and guess.

[Xavier_Onassis]

If the Administration does nothing in Syria, it will be accused of incompetence.
If it does something, and the resulting Syrian government after Assad is not to some politicians' liking, it will be accused of doing the wrong thing or not doing enough of the right thing.

It is almost certain that any possible post-Assad government will not happily accede to the Israelis seizing the Golam Heights. One thing that all Syrians have in common is the view that Golam must be returned. Suppose Mexico seized several border counties in Texas: would any US electorate agree with this, ever?

If the Administration arms the rebels, there will also be accusations of sucking up to evil Muslims and the like.

I see Syria as a no -win situation for not just the Obama Administration, but for any American Administration that might follow.

[Plane]

Yes.

Anyone who actually liked President Bush is familiar with the "Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't" principal.

I don't think that President Obama is quite finished with the benefit he gets from all that worship the press gives him , and the total benefit of the doubt.

After he jails a few reporters for reporting , then he might start getting some real criticism.


About Syria , I think that dithering is the worst choice, if the US chose a side , either side , and really threw our weight behind it the war would be shortened, saving a lot of life.

If the US announced that we would stay out of it and tryed to prevent all others from involvement , then the supplys needed for the fight would run down and the war would die of exaustion.

As it is both sides are getting plenty of borrowed bullets to shoot ,  but neither enough to overcome, this could go on quite a while.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I don't call what we are doing "dithering". We cannot support Assad. I don't think we should support the other side either. They have not done what they promised to do with the aid we have already sent them.

It is an impossible situation. DSyrians will die either way, but to say that it will be our fault is simply untrue.

[Plane]

Our governmental position is dithering, like a guy on the side of a pool doing rope tricks while someone in the middle of the pool is drowing.

The guy that didn't throw the rope might say that he didn't cause the drowning .

[Xavier_Onassis]

There is no rope that we can throw. The US proved it could not impose its system of government on Iraq, and what we ended up with, after killing thousands and dislocating millions, is not what was planned. It also cost a huge amount of money. We cannot repeat this in Syria, which is even more a divided country than Iraq was.

I am opposed to the US invading Syria. A no-fly zone like was used in Libya will not work, because the Russians are arming the Syrians with missiles. What we are doing is all we can do and perhaps more than we should do.

[Plane]

There is a rope to throw.

The USA made no attempt at all to impose our system of Government in Iraq, I wish we had, but a constitutional convention was called instead so that the Iriquis could make their own bed. They proved unready. 

Next time lets impose a carbon of the Japaneese constitution , with a sunset provision added , so that we can leave before they call a constitional convention.

All contries are devided , none more than our own , this is a poor excuse for having a cripplingly bad government .

There is no rope that we can throw. The US proved it could not impose its system of government on Iraq, and what we ended up with, after killing thousands and dislocating millions, is not what was planned. It also cost a huge amount of money. We cannot repeat this in Syria, which is even more a divided country than Iraq was.

I am opposed to the US invading Syria. A no-fly zone like was used in Libya will not work, because the Russians are arming the Syrians with missiles. What we are doing is all we can do and perhaps more than we should do.

Yes thanks Russia , for throwing a rescue rope , to the shark.


The missles are not there yet , would they truely be usefull mostly for shooting up UN forces trying to enforce no fly?

[Xavier_Onassis]

The US cannot write a constitution or impose any government on any nation. Japan was pretty easy, because of the fact that nearly all the men were killed or maimed in the war, and the attitude of the Japanese people to the total defeat of a war they had started.

Syria started no war with us. We do little trade with Syria. We cannot afford to conquer Syria like we did Iraq, anyway. If anything, we are spending too much effort on Syria. I could care less if the Russians took over the whole damned country. We are not to blame for Syrians killing other Syrians, just as we were not to blame with Congolese killing other Congolese.

Of course missiles would be useful in shooting down planes trying to impose a no fly zone.

[Plane]

The US cannot write a constitution or impose any government on any nation.

no, history indicates that we indeed can do exactly that, but that we can botch the job pretty badly sometimes when we do.

  Japan was pretty easy, because of the fact that nearly all the men were killed or maimed in the war, and the attitude of the Japanese people to the total defeat of a war they had started.

That is all we need do, again.

Syria started no war with us. We do little trade with Syria. We cannot afford to conquer Syria like we did Iraq, anyway. If anything, we are spending too much effort on Syria. I could care less if the Russians took over the whole damned country. We are not to blame for Syrians killing other Syrians, just as we were not to blame with Congolese killing other Congolese.

It would be nice if we could just watch and be nutral, but I do not think it possible , one or both sides will make us join, you might ask Woodrow Wilson or FDR about how easily nutrality is maintained.

Of course missiles would be useful in shooting down planes trying to impose a no fly zone.

Yes Russians are not nutral, they know that nutrality is not honorable nor profitable.

[Plane]

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.”
 Bishop Desmond Tutu
 

[Xavier_Onassis]

Bhutan can be neutral, Switzerland can be neutral, Sweden can be neutral, so OF COURSE the US can be neutral. The Russians want the use of a Mediterranean seaport. I don't think they care who rules Syria otherwise, they just do not want to lose what they already have.

The US failed to bring democracy to the Philippines, to Cuba, to Taiwan, to Vietnam, to South Korea. We have imposed dictatorships more often than created democracies. In the case of Japan, practically the entire male population of a male-dominated society was wiped out. We cannot repeat that. I am entirely opposed to the US doing any more in Syria than it is now doing. President Obama knows that few Americans want any more military adventures in the Middle East, and he will not start any. Too fucking bad the Angry Old White Guy Party failed to elect McCain the Insane. The US did not end Apartheid with military adventurism, either.

[Plane]

Bhutan can be neutral, Switzerland can be neutral, Sweden can be neutral, so OF COURSE the US can be neutral. The Russians want the use of a Mediterranean seaport. I don't think they care who rules Syria otherwise, they just do not want to lose what they already have.

Is there a reason to attempt nutrality?

The US failed to bring democracy to the Philippines, to Cuba, to Taiwan, to Vietnam, to South Korea. We have imposed dictatorships more often than created democracies..........................The US did not end Apartheid with military adventurism, either.

South Korea is really doing pretty well, and the Phillipines are better than ever, Japan is having a good year ,finally, and Vietnam missed an oppurtunity to became a great economy years ago,well  we tried.

If you were hunting and missed 80% of your game , would you think that you might as well starve, or would you keep hunting till you had enough in spite of the extra time it took?

South Africa had some outside help , but most of the pressure was from the people inside, and that is the key. Iraq has been given a fair chance and so has Afganistan, but unless the people on the scene are comitted to democracy , there just can't be any.

 In the case of Japan, practically the entire male population of a male-dominated society was wiped out. We cannot repeat that.

why do you say this?

I am entirely opposed to the US doing any more in Syria than it is now doing. President Obama knows that few Americans want any more military adventures in the Middle East, and he will not start any. Too fucking bad the Angry Old White Guy Party failed to elect McCain the Insane.

Are Air Force drones not military? Does Libia not count?

That is pretty much moot , President McCain will never be , but President Obama is no less likly to lead us into war than most other presidents including the hypothetical ones.

President Bush didn't plan to spend a dime on Afganistan, but he was not given a really better choice , this same thing can happen to President Obama, especially if he appears to be weak or indecisive.