51 U.S. Diplomats Urge Strikes Against Assad in Syria


#1

nytimes.com/2016/06/17/world/middleeast/syria-assad-obama-airstrikes-diplomats-memo.html?_r=0

I personally believe that we should leave him there, because as bad as he may be, I feel that Syria will get even worse if he’s killed.


#2

I don’t really know enough about the matter to comment, but I am surprised he has managed to stay in power since the civil war began.
I find the situation over there very confusing.


#3

Why should we take military advice from diplomats?

Who exactly do they propose to replace Assad with?


#4

Russia has a vested interest in Syria via Assad. Just saying.


#5

I wonder how these people would feel if 51 Russian diplomats urged strikes on Turkey or Saudi Arabia.


#6

Time for regime change, anyone?


#7

Chaos and ISIS, probably.

Much like we got with Libya.

So, not a huge change for Syria, I guess?


#8

Brings us back to the priority I think. There was a window I believe when Assad should have been overthrown right around that red-line with Obama. But today I am pretty convinced we need to take this area from isis first-‘the headquarters of so-called Islamic State’.

bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36595166

I don’t think anyone denies that the humanitarian crisis is historic in Syria but this has spiraled so far out of control. The issue here is we allowed this safe haven to grow and we have no plan. Obama has issues everywhere today including Libya, Northern Iraq and Afghanistan.


#9

How about no more regime change, no more Maidans? How about taking a staunch stance against fascism?


#10

Okay, so it didn’t work in Vietnam. Or Iran. Or Libya. Or Grenada. Or Nicaragua. Or Iraq.Or Afghanistan. Or Cuba.

But THIS TIME FOR SURE! :rolleyes:

I feel like I’m watching Rocky and Bullwinkle: “Hey Rocky, watch me pull a stable democracy outta my hat!”


#11

What if they are record breaking murderers with civilian slaughter?


#12

So the US will be popping right over to a very large number of nations then in short order no doubt …


#13

Im just saying in a hypothetical whats it take for us to remove a tyranny? I don’t think in last few years one could find one larger than Assad, so in a hypothetical comparison whats it take?

I have no idea where Obama is sending the US but thats another issue.


#14

So that is the new *casus belli *for war? The “right to protect”? Too bad the Soviets died not send in aircraft carriers to bomb El Salvador after the El Mozote massacre. There is no credible evidence that Bashar al-Assad has been engaged in widespread human rights atrocities.

President Assad: Okay, as I said earlier, the war is not a traditional war, it’s not about capturing land and gaining land; it’s about winning the hearts and minds of the Syrians. We cannot win the hearts of the Syrians while we are killing Syrians. We cannot sustain four years in that position as a government, and me as a president, while the rest of the world, most of the world, the great powers, the regional powers, are against me, and my people are against me. That’s impossible. I mean, this logic has no legs to stand on. This is not realistic, and this is against our interest, as a government, to kill the people. What do we get? What is the benefit of killing the people?

informationclearinghouse.info/article41423.htm


#15

The right to protect when the puppets are no longer needed is perhaps the more correct statement, as with Hussein and several other figures who outlived their usefulness to the US or were perceived to bite the hand that once fed them.


#16

So that is the new casus belli for war?

Thats what I’m asking whats it take on the psychotic list, little past Assad but not quite ___ fill in the blank? Surely theres a RED LINE? :eek:


#17

The memo goes on to say that John Kerry should use his diplomatic abilities to unseat Assad. John Kerry’s diplomatic abilities???:eek::eek::eek:

In any event, it’s too late. Putin hung back for a time to make sure neither the U.S. nor Turkey were going to do anything about Assad. Now there are Russians all over Assad’s territory. We’re not going to start shooting at Russians.

Obama’s “strategy” in all of this is to back Iran anyway in its takeover of the central Middle EAst. So he isn’t going to hit Assad, and that’s probably why he didn’t when he had the chance.

The Middle East is now a battleground between Iran and Sunni extremists, which is exactly what Iraqis and our own intelligence experts said would happen if Obama pulled out of Iraq too soon. But he ignored them all, and that’s exactly what happened.


#18

Kerry to his credit defuse a situation involving captured US sailors.

Obama and Kerry were successful in giving Ukraine its Maidan.

youtube.com/watch?v=1QAXmf5_EOs

And the US became indignant when the Crimeans refuse subjugation by the new coup government.


#19

I’m not sure a topic on Syria really calls for a an expression of Putin worship.


#20

I did not say anything about Putin, but I was responding to a claim that Kerry had no diplomatic ability.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.