Will Military Response to Syria Really Be "Limited"?

Did you pick 1, 2, or 3? Because your scenarios don't seem to coincide with any of those.

My closing words may have been open to interpretation but the law that I cited is not.

 

A: It hasn't been proven that Syria has used biological weapons. B: That loose interpretation of our bases being USA land on foreign soil, is such a very dangerous justification. If we take that justification to its true meaning, have we then not conquered said foreign soil and are those nations no longer even independent? This dangerous precedent can only last until we lose a war.

If we do, your precedent will be tested when/if we get tried in the ICC.

 

Syria is no threat to attack the US unless we attack them. Shooting a few missiles at them endangers the US and our assets not protect them. Of course Obama is the only president to believe that. The war powers act was to prevent overzealous leaders from dragging us into a needless war.

 

That's bull(*)(*)(*)(*), though. That's Neo-Con "logic". And it's totally fallacious. You're saying we're going to pre-empt them from doing something they "might" do. They haven't actually done it, they haven't even threatened to do it, there is no behavior on their part whatsoever that indicates they intend to do it, and yet, we must pre-empt them. Because we're paranoid of what they "might" do. Someday. Maybe.

 

A deal has already been made when Putin met with Obama a while back.

The U.S. agreed to allow the sale of Russian Missiles to Syria as Russia needed the cash and also promised that whatever or who ever comes to power in Syria after Assad will not effect Russian Gas Pipeline Interests.

In return Russia agreed to remove all Russian Personal from Syria as well Russia agreed that if the Chemical Weapons Inspectors find that Assad has used Chemical Weapons....Russia would stand by the U.S. and E.U. to force Assad from power.

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

 

The constitution alone should do that declaring war and raising armies is the job of congress. The president is in charge after congress allows it.

 

Correct! Obama chose not to defend our Consulate in Benghazi.

 

I didn't know that, that would be a major game changer if Russia could be on our side in this incursion. My main fear was Russian logistical, if not military support. I still hedge on the account of Iran's guarantee, which was very smart on their part. Would Russia also see to an Iranian collapse? Iran's guarantee might make Russia hedge on Western Support.

 

What sort of nonsense is that? Can Syria directly attack the US? No. Assad is accused of using chemical weapons, not biological, very big difference, I'd actually support nuking any nation that released a biological agent, regardless of who was involved, as that could pose a threat directly to every nation with an airport...

 

I agree with everything but is neocon logic they actually followed US law they just thumbed their nose at international law. This must be progressive logic they do not believe they have to follow any law.

 

With their presently owned delivery systems, Syria can attack over 100 USA bases. With a boat, they could sail right into the NY harbor and detonate a weapon before the harbor master even boarded. I recently read that only 1 out of ever 100 containers coming to USA are even inspected. That makes every ship coming into our ports a viable delivery system. And I am not saying that so you will sit up at night thinking "oh fsck oh fsck oh fsck". I have no inside knowledge of Syria planning to attack anyone. But I am merely saying she allegedly used WMD's against her own people, that she is in bed with Iran, that Iran was in North Korea for the three nuclear detonations, and that together Iran and Syria hate Israel and USA. If we decide to make any kind of military or covert move; that right there is a darn good reason to do so. We have over 3,000 tons of biological warfare compounds. We had over 35,000 tons until 1997 when we decided to start destroying our own ability to commit biological warfare. You have to know we aren't the only ones with chemical and biological capabilities.

 

While Russia will likely not get involved in a war directly. More than likely they will do to us as we did them in afganistan in the 80's. I doubt they are stupid enough to believe we can promise them anything. Look how Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan have worked out. Not to mention Egypt, we could screw up a wet dream and they know it.

 

Checks and balances...

These are Boehner's Questions according to the huffington...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/john-boehner-obama-syria_n_3832374.html

Seems to me that the House of Representatives is a little bit upset by the thought of Obama just doing whatever he wants. If he doesn't get a permission slip from Congress, maybe he will get a spanking?

 

We get ships from lots of countries, should we bomb the crap out of everyone that 'could' load a container with something? I think not...

Israel is our sworn ally, regardless of my opinions on that, its a fact, and we have an obligation to defend them if things go south. A simple reality check is necessary at this point. More people in the Middle East hate Israel than anyone else, even our new found friends in Iraq would jump at the chance to kill them, and we must protect them. Is anything that happens in little insignificant Syria really worth what could come? Over what? A chemical weapon that killed a tiny fraction of those killed in the overall conflict...

 

Declaring war <> military action at the command of a CinC. In past history, folks like Kennedy, LBJ and Nixon were definitely out of control and the War Powers Act was designed to put a halt to that. But the muslims attacked America on 9-11 and the response was something called the Authorization for Use of Military Force against Terrorists (AUMF). This gave the POTUS a lot more authority to exercise his constitutional powers as Commander in Chief (Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution). And before you say it's Unconstitional, SCOTUS already said it is. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0343_0579_ZS.html

 

I hate Israel too.(A strong statement, but if our government's spying on Americans without recourse anyway, does it matter what political positions we take?) Israel has long spied on, attacked(the USS Liberty) and has manipulated and used the country to its whims whenever it desired. We saw Netanyahu openly interfering with our political process, openly courting OUR Congress. Did that not make you sick? Or are you more a foreign citizen of the state of Israel than a national American?

I don't recognize Israel as an ally, it has thumbed INTL. Law, it has detained children, attacked foreign nations and has expressed aggression towards its Arabic neighbors. And maybe, even most infuriatingly of all, despite its cries about the "Iranian Problem", has Israel even ONCE entered with direct talks with Iran?

By direct talks, I mean without the G-7 or Western Nations backing it up. How much longer must America sanction Israel's actions in the region? How much longer must we bare the burden? And WHY should we? In what way has Israel even shown the slightest courtesy as an allied nation?

In comparison to the symbolic and deep relationship we have with Japan for over 100 years. There is no comparison. Heck, I find that we have more in common with Great Britain and the other European States.

We should ally with nations that tend NOT to ask us to fight their wars for them or stab us in the back whenever it's convenient.

 

Although I know Israel has been a pain now and then...our alliance does have benefits.

AboveAlpha

 

I don't really think this is completely about some muslim whacking 1,300 other muslims in some sh*t hole third world country. I'd be shocked if anyone thinks it's about that. This is about Syria and Iran getting bolder and bolder, and eventually giving these weapons to terrorists who WOULD use those weapons against USA and Israel. Syria has been a huge problem for a long time. She was the enemy in wars with Israel in 1948, 1967, 1973 and 1982. She merely has a tenuous cease-fire with Israel and is still at war with her. I wish Israel could become USA's 51st State or a possession like Puerto Rico. That would stop the problems in the Middle East pretty much overnight. Then the muslim countries would just have to get over the idea of eliminating all of the Jews in the Middle East once and for all.

 

Your friends on StormFront all asleep because it's 2 AM in Idaho; or did Moon invite you here? Either way, I'm just going to flush you into the bozo bin on your first series of posts in this forum. I cannot imagine you adding any value to this website. Bye bye.

 

Respectfully, I'll say a "pain" is an understatement. With their various actions surrounding INTL. Law and their treatment of us at times(especially with their espionage program), you wonder if they're more "friend" or "foe".

I guess I'll quote the President in regards to how I see them.

"Egypt(Israel) is neither ally nor enemy"

 

Says the person whose geopolitically cocky for his own good. You think we can't stopped, you think that an incursion into Syria has no consequences and I'm sure you feel absolutely nothing for say, the Palestinian civilians caught up in that massacre over there.

I hope that you're right about our geopolitical omnipotence, but I believe you're grossly mistaken.

 

I have been in the unfortunate position of acting as a Babysitter for members of these groups and I can tell you that the one thing that drives their policy is U.S. Aid.

AboveAlpha

 

The US launching even one cruise missile into Syria is an ACT of WAR, which would more than justify them giving some terrorist weapons to attack us here. Unless we are fully willing to take this all the way, committing acts of war on states that aren't afraid to use terrorists is probably not a good idea...

If we are going to do something, it had damn sure better mean that Assad has zero chance of winning or we are inviting whatever may come...

 

Of course it's an act of war. And of course they will respond. My bet is Syria attacks Israel (probably in the Golan Heights). My bet is also that once that happens that USA absolutely lays waste to Syria on a scale that makes what we did to Iraq in Desert Storm pale by comparison. I bet right now Russia is counseling Assad not to respond to a UN (UK/US/Canada) attack with any chemical weapons.