Berlin, 1945; Grozny, 2000; Aleppo, 2016 THANKS, REPUGS!

[Pelicans78]

The Arab Spring occurred in 2011 and was cheered on by Obama and Democrats as "Yay Democracy". So it's a little disingenuous for you to still blame all of the problems in the Middle East on Dubya. It was a ed up place before Bush, Bush ed it up more, and Obama has ed it up even more. Hillary is gonna fix that hole right up though.

The only hot spot during that time was the Isreali-Palestinian conflict. Not much else was going on other than dictators doing their thing.

[CosmicCowboy]

You're the one kowtowing to Soviet threats. Last week Putin threatened to use his SAMs if we participated like they were. Here you are acting like a feckless coward.

Turkey is the strategic asset. That is where they are running sorties out of. War actually does break out then that is a big strategic problem for Putin due to simple geography.

And exactly what do you propose to accomplish by starting WWIII?

[Pelicans78]

Your beloved knitter Pres was Dem Senator who didn't vote for Iraq.

The Dems were lied to by the Repugs.

All the Middle East storm and terrorism has been, is, and will be TOTALLY on the Repugs and BigOil.

That's bull . He wasn't even a senator until 2004 you dumbass

The war started in 2003 and the vote took place in 2002. Go jump off a bridge loser.

[Pelicans78]

The same planes we've been running out of Turkey and the Persian Gulf. We don't have a proxy. We just aid the Kurds and NSA with air power. To now we only target ISIS and no one else.

That's the only group we should be targeting. Assad hasn't declared war on the U.S.

[CosmicCowboy]

You do understand that if Russia SAMs start attacking US forces that means they provoked WW3 right? Russia took the chance of our reprisal when they started attacking our allies. That is why we are told Obama is weak etc. Either you abandon that rhetoric or put your money where your mouth is when you call him weak and feckless.

Your logic is, as usual, absurd. If we attack them and they respond by shooting back at our planes THEY are starting the war?

[UNT Eagles 2016]

Yeah fighting alongside Iranian backed es against Sunnis in Iraq and then fighting alongside Sunnis against Iranian backed es just next door in Syria seems like a really good plan to achieve stability in the region.

LIKE!!!!!!! Finally someone with a brain

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And exactly what do you propose to accomplish by starting WWIII?

We play it just like Putin did. Claim that our sorties are for ISIS and then blow the out of the forces besieging Aleppo near the Turkish border.

It's a risk for reprisal but I don't think Putin wants WW3 either. He is not in a good strategic position and if he is positioned such that he is considered the provocateur then China doesn't throw in. He would lose badly with Turkey to his south and all of Europe to his West.

If you don't want to do that then fine but we should just pull out and leave our one time allies to their fate while the Russians obliterate them. This halfassed method of Obama is bull in my view. I guess you like it.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

That's the only group we should be targeting. Assad hasn't declared war on the U.S.

Agree 1100000%

It's not our F'ing business to police "humanitarian" concerns in third world countries. It is our business to obliterate groups that want to kill us, however. 2 brain cells!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Your logic is, as usual, absurd. If we attack them and they respond by shooting back at our planes THEY are starting the war?

I'm not saying attack Russian assets. I'm saying to attack the militias and Syrian Army attacking Aleppo, dimwit

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That's the only group we should be targeting. Assad hasn't declared war on the U.S.

That is fine then what are we doing in Syria in the first place?

[CosmicCowboy]

I'm not saying attack Russian assets. I'm saying to attack the militias and Syrian Army attacking Aleppo, dimwit

No surprise, but that's just ing dumb. Missiles will be flying the second we break Syrian airspace. You really think the Russians wouldn't pull the trigger?

[SnakeBoy]

And Iraq had no separate political iden y because of Hussein's suppression over the previous 30 years. The NSA and the Peshmerga are what they are. Go read some Clausewitz.

Seriously? You bring up Clausewitz to defend your simplistic view of a war with Syria? And Russia

Go read some Clausewitz Fuzzy

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Seriously? You bring up Clausewitz to defend your simplistic view of a war with Syria?

Go read some Clausewitz Fuzzy

ARe you even going to address my point about the vacuum outside of the Baathists in Iraq and the difference in Syria? The Sunnis in Iraq have no proxy; Hussein, Mawlaki and Badr made sure of that. In Syria there is the FSA as well as al Nusra wahabbists.

You are the one with the mindnumbing oversimplification of Iraq = Syria. When I rebutt it you call me simple? Eat a , yoni.

[CosmicCowboy]

That is fine then what are we doing in Syria in the first place?

what do you want to do?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

what do you want to do?

or get off the pot. Obama's strategy reminds me of the lawyers running Vietnam.

[boutons_deux]

That is fine then what are we doing in Syria in the first place?

neocons have wanted "regime change" throughout the Middle East for decades.

They got it, and now the Middle East is an unending storm, America has lost 10Ks of military to dead, maiming of mind and body, and The West gets Bataclan, San Bernardino, etc, etd.

Russia and its -measuring murdere protects its protege Assad against American regime change. I guess the neocons didn't think about that, or maybe they really wanted to go to war with Russia, since the neocons are war profiteers.

[SnakeBoy]

ARe you even going to address my point about the vacuum outside of the Baathists in Iraq and the difference in Syria? The Sunnis in Iraq have no proxy; Hussein, Mawlaki and Badr made sure of that. In Syria there is the FSA as well as al Nusra wahabbists.

I'm not going to debate you on what a smooth transition Syria would have if we took out Assad. It's too stupid to debate. It's basically Bill Kristol's view you're arguing for. Only a dumb mother er would still be agreeing with that guy when it comes to matters of war.

[SnakeBoy]

or get off the pot. Obama's strategy reminds me of the lawyers running Vietnam.

That I can agree with. The Vietnam analogy should give you a hint as to what the choice should be.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

neocons have wanted "regime change" throughout the Middle East for decades.

They got it, and now the Middle East is an unending storm, America has lost 10Ks of military to dead, maiming of mind and body, and The West gets Bataclan, San Bernardino, etc, etd.

Russia and its -measuring murdere protects its protege Assad against American regime change. I guess the neocons didn't think about that, or maybe they really wanted to go to war with Russia, since the neocons are war profiteers.

If you want to leave Syria, I am fine with it but having servicemen running missions over there with no plan and nebulous objectives is horse . I really don't like setting ourselves up as allies to the Kurds and FSA then abandoning them but if that is what is in the interest of the country then fine.

This halfassed needs to go one way or the other and cowards like CC capitulating to Russian threats at face value makes me nauseous. Obama is a terrible CiC.

[boutons_deux]

"Iraq was a sectarian country that was ruled by a brutal dictator. We removed the dictator "

The old "Saddam was a BAD MAN" bull .

The Repugs sure improved the M/E by invading Iraq for BigOil. The M/E is so much better now that Saddam removed, Iraq destroyed. Wonderful!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm not going to debate you on what a smooth transition Syria would have if we took out Assad. It's too stupid to debate. It's basically Bill Kristol's view you're arguing for. Only a dumb mother er would still be agreeing with that guy when it comes to matters of war.

I won't argue but I will make the argument of characterizing your argument so as to deride. You are such an intellectual coward, Yoni.

Who said anything about us taking over Damascus? I'm talking about relieving our FSA allies in aleppo. Nothing more and nothing less. I understand that Sunni boots need to win militarily. Thing is they were up until 9 months ago when Russia intervened. Assad was retreating.

[SnakeBoy]

We could start attacking Assad's forces which we have been unwilling to do.

I'm talking about relieving our FSA allies in aleppo. Nothing more and nothing less.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You do understand that relieving them would include breaking the siege right? Assad's Syrian Army is the one besieging Aleppo, dimwit.

[CosmicCowboy]

You do understand that relieving them would include breaking the siege right? Assad's Syrian Army is the one besieging Aleppo, dimwit.

Do you not understand that attacking Syrian Forces by air will involve US airplanes being shot down with soviet A-400 missiles? It is being realistic, not cowardly, to acknowledge that, dumbass.

[DMC]

How about all the Democrats who voted for the Iraq war and the current administration increasing drone strikes and letting things get worse the last 8 years?

Thanks Democraps!!!

But it's ok because they regret it now. They said ollie ollie ox in free and so they are forgiven just like that. bam... never happened.