These Are The Rebels Obama Wants To Arm And Support

The Cysko Kid

Yeah. Total chaos and religious zealotry are so much better.

Erie Dawg

@the-cysko-kid said:
Yeah. Total chaos and religious zealotry are so much better.

Its like asking someone to choose between a bird shitn on their forehead or nose. Neither one is better than the other.

The Cysko Kid

Sorry. I have to disagree here. Assad is better than the rebels. Way better.

Westside Steve

Way?

but who cares? If they win we really didn't do enough to be considered an ally and when, they lose we'll be considered the enemy.

By the way 1 of the reasons for the insignificant amount of help we provided in libya was because Khadafi threatened to go door to door drag the rebels out and kill them. Anybody remember that the rebels did exactly that?

WSS

heckofajobbrownie

Make no mistake, far from backing Iran to crush the rebels, this is precisely the opposite. We're getting into this to beat back Iranian influence.

calfoxwc

It's a no win situation. I think it was Pelosi? that went to Syria, over WH objections, and had

a nice visit with Assad back in the Bush years. Assad was the dem's hero, as well as Chavez,

and Castro.

go figure, ....

If the rebels win, what good does it do to allow a new Islamic state to be created, as Iran was back

in the day? Yeah, it really helped to get rid of that really bad western "friendly" dictator in Iran.

History will repeat itself?

The Cysko Kid

One of the funniest jokes is us claiming we're only going to arm the "moderate pro-western" rebels. Ha-ha. Osama Bin Laden was a pro western rebel until he was the world's top terrorist. There are no friendly rebels.

heckofajobbrownie

Here are some guns. Now go shoot some dudes from Hezbollah.

That's as much of the plan as I can make sense of.

The only other part is political - that Obama drew a "red line" and the intelligence agencies think Assad crossed it, so he has to do something. And giving the rebels light arms is the least he can do that counts as a response while not getting truly involved.

calfoxwc

"not truly involved" doesn't sound right, maybe.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/us-troops-conducting-military-exercises-syrian-border-19441253

And more American troops are being readied for....Egypt.

The Cysko Kid

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Here are some guns. Now go shoot some dudes from Hezbollah.

That's as much of the plan as I can make sense of.

The only other part is political - that Obama drew a "red line" and the intelligence agencies think Assad crossed it, so he has to do something. And giving the rebels light arms is the least he can do that counts as a response while not getting truly involved.

Red line. What a joke. The rebels have used chemical weapons and nobody seems to care about that. Rebels also behead people and eat their organs. I can post a picture of a rebel with a human head on a grill if you like, but it doesn't seem to cross Obamas red line. But then his red line is horse shit. Mexicans are beheading women and children and posting it on the internet and we're fucking worrying about helping the Syrian rebels because Assad allegedly gassed them? Our priorities are fucked. One brutal war is a lot closer to home than the other.

heckofajobbrownie

It seems arbitrary, but there are good reasons that the international community doesn't want to greenlight a future where chemical weapons are used and that's the new normal, wouldn't you agree? That's a pretty scary future. Hence, the "red line."

It's international law, and has been for decades. I don't have a problem with punishing anyone who thinks about starting the world down that road. It leads to a pretty awful place.

heckofajobbrownie

In other words, giving me the guy cutting out the heart and eating it. He's a barbarian, and history is littered with them. But he can't descend on a on a small city in a haze that kills everyone who breathes him in - man, woman, and child.

The Cysko Kid

I'd rather be gassed I think than have my head chopped off with an axe while alive. If you'd rather the opposite so be it, for you.

Also I think you're forgetting the part where our precious rebels also used chemical weapons

http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/06/putin-claims-proof-syrian-rebels-used-chemical-weapons/

heckofajobbrownie

They're not my precious rebels. And that's World Net Daily.

It's not a matter of how you'd rather die. (And death by chemical weapons is a gruesome affair, so I'm not sure what's so preferable about it.) It's that a guy with an axe isn't a weapon of mass destruction.

States have an obvious and legitimate interest in banning the use of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.

The Cysko Kid

Whatever source reported it Putin said it. You know who sucks at intelligence? The KGB. Oh wait, they're kind of good at it.

DieHardBrownsFan

I'm sure the U.N also verified that it was the rebels who used the chemical weapons. Heck is speaking newspeak.

calfoxwc

That's because heckbunker has to hide that he's an idiot who can't keep to any subject.but for a few moments of time.

heckofajobbrownie

@the-cysko-kid said:
Whatever source reported it Putin said it. You know who sucks at intelligence? The KGB. Oh wait, they're kind of good at it.

I'm not saying Putin didn't say it. I'm saying don't get your news from World Net Daily. It's not news.

We (our intelligence agencies) think we have proof that these weapons were used. We have tissue samples, video, doctors testimony, our own people on the ground, etc. That is how we're making that determination. This can all be questioned, of course, but we're hardly in a position to do it.

The point you were raising is one I don't agree with. You were suggesting that it doesn't matter which way you die in a war, whether someone chops off your head or gases your village. I simply don't agree. Chemical and biological weapons and nuclear weapons are uniquely deadly and must not be allowed, ever. People who use them must be confronted by the international community.

That's been American and international policy for decades.

calfoxwc

Weird. Just read that the CIA has been secretly training Syrian rebels for months now.

You'd think they would know whether or not chemical weapons were used by Assad or not.

Say, those the same weapons that were carted from Iraq in trucks?

The Cysko Kid

@heckofajobbrownie said:

I'm not saying Putin didn't say it. I'm saying don't get your news from World Net Daily. It's not news.

We (our intelligence agencies) think we have proof that these weapons were used. We have tissue samples, video, doctors testimony, our own people on the ground, etc. That is how we're making that determination. This can all be questioned, of course, but we're hardly in a position to do it.

The point you were raising is one I don't agree with. You were suggesting that it doesn't matter which way you die in a war, whether someone chops off your head or gases your village. I simply don't agree. Chemical and biological weapons and nuclear weapons are uniquely deadly and must not be allowed, ever. People who use them must be confronted by the international community.

That's been American and international policy for decades.

No actually that's not the point I was trying to make. The point I was trying to make is that deadly chemical agents are more humane than being hacked to pieces whilst alive. I don't see why THAT'S the imaginary red line. And I'm not sure America, the only country who has ever used nuclear weapons on other humans has the right to play pretend indignant over it. If we're not going to directly intervene we need to stay the fuck out of it. Arming a thousand future bin ladens is a fucking terrible idea.

My other point is that if we're going to get involved in a terrible brutal war it would really serve our best interests as citizens to get involved in Mexico because the things they're up to down there violate every human right there is and these hardened and soulless killers can cross our borders basically at will.