Does this make sense?

#1
Rasputin_Vol

Rasputin_Vol

"Slava Ukraina"
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
70,882
Likes
38,904
#1
Washington Risks Falling for Syria's ISIS Strategy, Again - NBC News

But the White House is vowing to fight, declaring the United States is now at war with ISIS and will build an international coalition to crush the group. So far, the most enthusiastic response has come from the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad. It’s hardly surprising. In fact, it follows a consistent Syrian tactic of using Islamic militants to create instability — and then relying on the U.S. to destroy them.

Washington fell for it once, and may do so again. ISIS is in many ways a creation of the Syrian regime. Now Syria wants the U.S. to destroy the group. We’ve seen this movie before.
Click to expand...

Assad doesn’t have the precision weapons or American-style special operations forces to find and kill the Islamists. He wants the Americans to do what they did after 2008. He wants U.S. forces to clean up the mess he made. Syrian government officials are now calling on the administration to join the Syrian government to fight ISIS together. If the U.S. starts bombing ISIS, it will be helping Assad. It’s the same tactic Syria used effectively in Iraq — and nothing is more often replicated than success.
Click to expand...


So wait... Assad is inviting the US to come into Syria? The same Assad that the US was itching to attack last year? His sinister plan is to lure the US into Syria and have them fight Islamic militants... giving the US the excuse they need to then finish what they were trying to do last year, which is overthrow Assad?

Really? Who is writing this stuff?
 
#2
#2
Rasputin_Vol said:
Washington Risks Falling for Syria's ISIS Strategy, Again - NBC News






So wait... Assad is inviting the US to come into Syria? The same Assad that the US was itching to attack last year? His sinister plan is to lure the US into Syria and have them fight Islamic militants... giving the US the excuse they need to then finish what they were trying to do last year, which is overthrow Assad?

Really? Who is writing this stuff?
Click to expand...

zBarBpY.jpg
 
#3
#3
Septic said:
zBarBpY.jpg
Click to expand...


The reasons for those captions are pretty simple: 1) Freak people out that Muslims are coming to kill us; and 2) continue the mantra that Obama doesn't care.

Only thing missing is language at the bottom that says "because he's a secret Agent Muslim."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4
#4
It's makes sense of you believe the US has no clue what they're doing with foreign policy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5
#5
utvolpj said:
It's makes sense of you believe the US has no clue what they're doing with foreign policy.
Click to expand...


That's because there are way too many people who grew up on WWII movies and think in terms of battle lines, guys in uniforms that tell you which side they are on, and rules of war that make sense if you are playing a board game.

This is a wee bit different. No one signs a treaty at Yalta, or says the other side won. There are no identifiable "sides."

I wish people would grow up and realize how murky this kind of thing is, and how it's never going to completely make sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6
#6
If you can't really identify the enemy then how will this all be done with air power?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8
#8
lawgator1 said:
That's because there are way too many people who grew up on WWII movies and think in terms of battle lines, guys in uniforms that tell you which side they are on, and rules of war that make sense if you are playing a board game.

This is a wee bit different. No one signs a treaty at Yalta, or says the other side won. There are no identifiable "sides."

I wish people would grow up and realize how murky this kind of thing is, and how it's never going to completely make sense.
Click to expand...

So why do people crow about the Geneva Convention when it comes to the thugs currently housed at Gitmo?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#9
#9
also the White House, whether its Obama himself or one of his staff have no ability to declare war, once that comes out of the Capitol it means something.
 
#10
#10
LouderVol said:
also the White House, whether its Obama himself or one of his staff have no ability to declare war, once that comes out of the Capitol it means something.
Click to expand...

False. Obama declared war on Ebola just yesterday.
 
#11
#11
Septic said:
False. Obama declared war on Ebola just yesterday.
Click to expand...

oh he can make all the declarations he wants, doesn't mean we are really at war. I realize this was probably tongue in cheek but still i had to react.
 
#13
#13
MG1968 said:
So why do people crow about the Geneva Convention when it comes to the thugs currently housed at Gitmo?
Click to expand...


You can make a good argument that some of its provisions are obsolete, or at least outdated, and need to be revisited given the new realities of warfare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#14
#14
lawgator1 said:
You can make a good argument that some of its provisions are obsolete, or at least outdated, and need to be revisited given the new realities of warfare.
Click to expand...

No, it covers uniformed combatants pretty good. We're fighting criminals now so it shouldn't apply.
 
#15
#15
lawgator1 said:
The reasons for those captions are pretty simple: 1) Freak people out that Muslims are coming to kill us; and 2) continue the mantra that Obama doesn't care.

Only thing missing is language at the bottom that says "because he's a secret Agent Muslim."
Click to expand...

It's no secret..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#16
#16
We haven't declared war since WWII. You don't have to go through congress.
 
#17
#17
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top