You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 03, 2016, 04:03:47 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: US warships near Syrian waters  (Read 8979 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kythia

  • Noooo-one Fights like Kythia no-one bites like Kythia
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Gender: Female
  • No one chain smokes Marlboro lights like Kythia
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #125 on: September 01, 2013, 10:35:09 AM »
Im not saying we should do nothing, but there has to be a plan for what to do once Assad is gone.

There totally is!  Muddle on through with fingers crossed and hope for the best.

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #126 on: September 01, 2013, 10:38:37 AM »
Alright let me rephrase....


A BETTER plan. :)

Offline Luna

  • Muse's Blessing ~ Shadowsmaiden's little Koneko-chan
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2012
  • Location: The deep end of the gene pool
  • Gender: Female
  • My soul is painted like the wings of butterflies
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #127 on: September 01, 2013, 10:39:02 AM »
I totally agree there. It's pretty much a toss up as to whether things would fall in the hands of moderates or religious extremists. All I was saying was that if all we do is a targeted strike to "punish" Asad for using chemical weapons(which I still think we should do, btw) it won't be enough to give the rebels much of an added advantage, and if that's all we are going to do, I don't think Asad is going anywhere any time soon.

Then again, I was thinking that about Khadafi(or however you spell it, heh) as well, and I'm certainly not an expert on Middle East geo-politics.

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #128 on: September 01, 2013, 10:47:20 AM »
Im not saying we should do nothing, but there has to be a plan for what to do once Assad is gone.
Why?

I mean this in deadly seriousness. Why is it up to anybody outside Syria to decide Syria's fate? As far as I'm aware, there hasn't been a widespread request for UN or NATO intervention by Syrian civilians... so maybe we should get out of the business of dictating the future of Middle Eastern people against their will?

Please note that I am considering this issue separately from the situation as it stands now. As far as I'm concerned, Syria seems to be caught in a civil war between two groups of terrorists. But I find it kind of disturbing that, in all this talk of what we should and should not do, nobody seems to think we should ask the Syrian people.

The other disturbing note is that it feels like we're leaping very quickly to violence as a first resort, but I'm weaker on that point - I'd accept this if it could be shown that military intervention will reduce the bloodshed in the area more than it will add to it.

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #129 on: September 01, 2013, 10:57:46 AM »
Because the Syrian people don't know what they want and even if they did, there isn't exactly a lot of choice.

There should be a democratic Syrian government but if the UN disposes of Assad, they also have to help set that up. If they dispose of Assad and then leave, Syria will sink into an even deeper crisis and civil war.

Second to that, apparently there is Sarin gas somewhere in Syria. If the UN leaves Syria, somebody will get hold of that Sarin gas and God what else and frankly, that isn't a good thought.

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #130 on: September 01, 2013, 11:03:54 AM »
Because the Syrian people don't know what they want and even if they did, there isn't exactly a lot of choice.
I'm not seeing how "...so we should dictate terms that are overwhelmingly unlikely to remotely resemble what anyone in Syria wants" flows from this premise.

There should be a democratic Syrian government but if the UN disposes of Assad, they also have to help set that up. If they dispose of Assad and then leave, Syria will sink into an even deeper crisis and civil war.
Which would be true, if UN intervention were even a remote possibility, and if the goal of intervention were to depose Assad. As far as I can tell, neither of these is true; can you provide some links that show otherwise?

Second to that, apparently there is Sarin gas somewhere in Syria. If the UN leaves Syria, somebody will get hold of that Sarin gas and God what else and frankly, that isn't a good thought.
"Destroy the sarin" isn't exactly a plan for deposing a dictator and installing a replacement government. It's not even necessarily a post-Assad strategy - the only thing stopping us from doing it right now is a lack of specific targets.

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #131 on: September 01, 2013, 11:12:17 AM »
I'm not seeing how "...so we should dictate terms that are overwhelmingly unlikely to remotely resemble what anyone in Syria wants" flows from this premise.

You make it a habit to read things into what I say. I said the UN should help the Syrian people in the transition to a democracy. Furthermore, in my opinion there is no point in an intervention of any sort if it's not the goal to dispose of Assad. Might as well sit on our hands and do nothing.

Offline Imogen

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #132 on: September 01, 2013, 11:20:42 AM »
I totally agree there. It's pretty much a toss up as to whether things would fall in the hands of moderates or religious extremists. All I was saying was that if all we do is a targeted strike to "punish" Asad for using chemical weapons(which I still think we should do, btw) it won't be enough to give the rebels much of an added advantage, and if that's all we are going to do, I don't think Asad is going anywhere any time soon.

Then again, I was thinking that about Khadafi(or however you spell it, heh) as well, and I'm certainly not an expert on Middle East geo-politics.

So, you suggest a strike should be launched as a punishment because one side used a chemical weapon that is responsible for the death of about 300 people.

Since the civil war 2 years ago started approximately 100,000 people have died in Syria.

And now you say the west should issue a strike that tells Assad "no no Assad, you can kill thousands, but play nice and just use the weapons we approve of."

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #133 on: September 01, 2013, 11:25:24 AM »
You make it a habit to read things into what I say. I said the UN should help the Syrian people in the transition to a democracy. Furthermore, in my opinion there is no point in an intervention of any sort if it's not the goal to dispose of Assad. Might as well sit on our hands and do nothing.
First: Um, no you didn't. You said "there has to be a plan for what to do when Assad is gone." Just a slight difference. Second: You are talking about marching in, kicking over the existing government, and telling, not asking, its subjects what the successor government will look like. What is that if not "dictating terms"? As for the rest of my statement: There are a nigh-infinite number of potential "post-Assad plans". There are a finite number of Syrians. Statistics alone will tell you that hitting on a plan to make Syria happy is an overwhelmingly remote possibility. Perhaps, before slinging accusations, you should check what you actually said vs what you meant to say.

The UN will never intervene as long as Russia and China have the ability to block it. If it were to intervene, then its goal should be to minimize harm to the civilian population. Deposing Assad may be a means to this end, but I completely reject the premise that it should ever be the primary goal.

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #134 on: September 01, 2013, 11:28:23 AM »
So what are you suggesting?

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #135 on: September 01, 2013, 11:35:39 AM »
I'm suggesting that maybe we should talk to some actual Syrians before we decide the future of another Middle Eastern nation, for one.

That we consider non-military approaches to improve the lot of civilians, for another.

That we consider the bloodshed military intervention will cause, and take that into account when assessing how much a given strategy will improve things in the area.

That the best options appear to be either "find and destroy the chemical weapons facilities, then get the hell out" (which will require boots on the ground, if we want to be sure we're blowing up chemical weapons plants and not hospitals), or "knock over both Assad and the rebels, then let the people of Syria decide their own future in UN-monitored proceedings."

And maybe, just maybe, that China and Russia should care about actual harm to actual people a bit more than scoring political points.

EDIT: I'm not deciding on a specific strategy because I don't have enough data - but I don't think anybody who is dictating strategy has enough, either.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2013, 11:36:42 AM by Ephiral »

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #136 on: September 01, 2013, 11:51:17 AM »
This has nothing to do with China or Russia. This has to do with the fact that something has to be done about Assad and talking to him is not working. Any person willingly targetting his own people Sarin gas is a complete whack job to which nothing else helps but violence.

He has to go and he won't give up without a fight so the only answer to that, is to give him the fight.

Before anybody does anything in Syria though, they need a plan for what is to happen when it's done. Any kind of plan.


Offline mia h

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #137 on: September 01, 2013, 12:37:20 PM »
Ignoring how tenuous the argument was, when Iraq was invaded various governments were able to come up with enough legal cover to allow them to invade, that legal cover doesn't exist when it comes to Syria. There are international treaties on the use of chemical weapons that cover the use of these weapons on foreign nationals but they are being use on Syrian nationals so those are irrelevant and the other chemical weapons treaties, Syria is a signatory to so they don't apply.

So the only justification for an invasion is that the West doesn't like Assad or what he's doing within in within his sovereign territory. But once you go down that road what's to stop everyone doing it as well? The Chinese suddenly decide that shrimps being thrown on barbies is a barbaric act and invade Australia to stamp the practice out.

As for post-invasion plans, there was one in Iraq believe it or not. It was roughly "After the invasion, everyone will see us as liberators and within six months Iraq will be back on it's feet and we can go home." We all know how well that turned, so having just any kind of plan isn't going to cut it. Any invasion is going to require a commitment of at least a decade for nation building and the political will for that just doesn't exist.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #138 on: September 01, 2013, 12:44:29 PM »
I'm not seeing how "...so we should dictate terms that are overwhelmingly unlikely to remotely resemble what anyone in Syria wants" flows from this premise.
Which would be true, if UN intervention were even a remote possibility, and if the goal of intervention were to depose Assad. As far as I can tell, neither of these is true; can you provide some links that show otherwise?
"Destroy the sarin" isn't exactly a plan for deposing a dictator and installing a replacement government. It's not even necessarily a post-Assad strategy - the only thing stopping us from doing it right now is a lack of specific targets.

+1

Personally, I think we should keep our big noses out of it. It's a civil war. You did not see the middle east come running to the aid of the North or the South when we had our Civil War did you? If it expands outside of the Syrian borders then sure, I say there should be some involvement. Until then - leave it the hell alone. Not our business no matter how much politicians think we have a right to put US approved governments in place.

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #139 on: September 01, 2013, 12:49:48 PM »
So let me get this straight...

when Russia implements a law preventing propaganda towards homosexuality, the world's too small and everybody is saying how terrible that is to oppress a minority group in Russia.

But when a dictator uses sarin gas against his own people we should all sit tight and do nothing...


Wow... just.. wow...

I'm speechless.

Offline mia h

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #140 on: September 01, 2013, 12:58:34 PM »
So let me get this straight...

when Russia implements a law preventing propaganda towards homosexuality, the world's too small and everybody is saying how terrible that is to oppress a minority group in Russia.

But when a dictator uses sarin gas against his own people we should all sit tight and do nothing...


Wow... just.. wow...

I'm speechless.

I think people are saying both things are terrible. But if people just saying things are terrible isn't enough and that the only way to stop the oppression of groups that don't agree with that countries government is invasion, exactly when do you think Russia should be invaded?

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #141 on: September 01, 2013, 01:00:54 PM »
You did not just compare a law banning homosexual propaganda with the use of sarin gas did you? Cause I don't think that's even remotely the same.

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #142 on: September 01, 2013, 01:12:38 PM »
+1

Personally, I think we should keep our big noses out of it. It's a civil war. You did not see the middle east come running to the aid of the North or the South when we had our Civil War did you? If it expands outside of the Syrian borders then sure, I say there should be some involvement. Until then - leave it the hell alone. Not our business no matter how much politicians think we have a right to put US approved governments in place.

No, but the British did build two warships for the Confederacy (the CSS Alabama and Shenandoah), and there was an attempt by the CSA to get one from France.  The CSS Stonewall was built under the name Sphynx, but ultimately the sale was blocked.  Australia served as a supply base for Confederate blockade runners, as did the Bahamas.  Russia offered at least verbal support for the Union side.  Several Prussian military officers served on the war, with representatives on both sides of the conflict.  Several thousand Canadians served in the Union army (and a couple hundred in the Confederate army).  Among those in the Union was a lieutenant who eventually composed 'O Canada'.  At least 29 Canadian-born men were awarded the Medal of Honor for their participation.

Offline mia h

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #143 on: September 01, 2013, 01:17:45 PM »
You did not just compare a law banning homosexual propaganda with the use of sarin gas did you? Cause I don't think that's even remotely the same.

You were the one that was comparing the two acts, now while they are not in the same ball park morally when it comes to international law they are pretty much the same. Both are legal acts within the respective sovereign territories and don't break international treaties so invading either country would be an act of war.
So now we should go around declaring war based on the level of moral outrage we feel about something? And who's morals should we be using as a base line? And if another and country feels moral outrage about us, because of cultural differences, then they should be allowed to invaded and rebuild the country in a way that is more in line with thier cultural norms?

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #144 on: September 01, 2013, 01:24:59 PM »
Wow...

Offline Iniquitous

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #145 on: September 01, 2013, 01:25:54 PM »
No, but the British did build two warships for the Confederacy (the CSS Alabama and Shenandoah), and there was an attempt by the CSA to get one from France.  The CSS Stonewall was built under the name Sphynx, but ultimately the sale was blocked.  Australia served as a supply base for Confederate blockade runners, as did the Bahamas.  Russia offered at least verbal support for the Union side.  Several Prussian military officers served on the war, with representatives on both sides of the conflict.  Several thousand Canadians served in the Union army (and a couple hundred in the Confederate army).  Among those in the Union was a lieutenant who eventually composed 'O Canada'.  At least 29 Canadian-born men were awarded the Medal of Honor for their participation.

If memory of American History serves me correct, at least in the matter of the Confederacy - they asked for help from Britain and France (distinctly remember France). Point I am making is... the Syrian people have not asked for help. And I am not arguing the whole "maybe they cant ask for help" either. We have not been asked to assist in their civil war and I do not think we should be charging in.

Do I think it horrible that people are dying? Yes. It is disgusting that so many are losing their lives. But in the same breath - it is not our place to dictate to other countries how they should live, how their governments should run. It is not our place to march in and make people do what we want them to do... even if what we want them to do is treat their citizens as human beings. (And that statement applies to Russia as well since they seemed to think they can treat one whole community as subpar)

And lastly, my son did not sign up for the US military to go fight a civil war for another country overrun by people that hate the United States.

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #146 on: September 01, 2013, 01:28:12 PM »
So the US Military should ONLY protect the US?

Offline Iniquitous

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #147 on: September 01, 2013, 01:33:28 PM »
You have a very bad habit of only responding to the part of a post that you can use to further an argument.

Please re-read what I have posted, specifically the part where I stated we have not been asked for help.

As for my personal opinion on the matter... seeing that it is my flesh and blood that would be sent over there, especially considering what his MOS is in the military, no I don't want to get involved. I do not want to lose the child I carried, birth and raised for a bunch of ungrateful people who think the US needs to burn.

Online Dashenka

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #148 on: September 01, 2013, 01:37:56 PM »
I know that Syria didn't ask for help but wouldn't you agree that sometimes the world should help even without asking?

If a small child is bullied at school, you would help that kid right? Or would you wait until he/she asks for help?

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: US warships near Syrian waters
« Reply #149 on: September 01, 2013, 01:45:23 PM »
I know that Syria didn't ask for help but wouldn't you agree that sometimes the world should help even without asking?

If a small child is bullied at school, you would help that kid right? Or would you wait until he/she asks for help?

Point of fact. The council of rebel groups HAVE asked for aid. To NATO, the US, the EU, the Arab League and anyone else who would listen. The GOVERNMENT hasn't.. but then they started off by shooting protestors.