ADVERTISEMENT

POLL: How Do You Feel About Boots On the Ground in Syria?

How do you feel about the move to put boots on the ground in Syria?

  • I preferred Romney to win and I think this is a timid move.

    Votes: 4 15.4%

  • I preferred Romney to win and I think this is a good move.

    Votes: 2 7.7%

  • I preferred Romney to win and I disapprove of this move.

    Votes: 5 19.2%

  • I preferred Obama to win and I think this is a timid move.

    Votes: 3 11.5%

  • I preferred Obama to win and I think this is a good move.

    Votes: 3 11.5%

  • I preferred Obama to win and I disapprove of this move.

    Votes: 9 34.6%
  • Total voters
    26
What Would Jesus Do?

What Would Jesus Do?

HB King
Nov 28, 2010
87,377
42,088
113
Maryland
When I first mentioned this, I was just reacting to the (fairly obvious) hints from Ashton Carter. Now it's official. What do you think?

Supposedly under 50 troops. Supposedly they won't be involved in regular combat missions.

Yeah, we know that tune.
 
Hate the idea.

My dad had a good friend that was an "advisor" in 1961-62 in Vietnam. He "wasn't involved in combat missions" while he was there. After the official start of American offensive operations in 1965, his record was reviewed and he was retroactively awarded 2 Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and 2 Bronze Stars (all 3 with a V device).

If those SF troops are in Syria, they'll be involved in combat missions.
 
SSG T said:
Hate the idea.

My dad had a good friend that was an "advisor" in 1961-62 in Vietnam. He "wasn't involved in combat missions" while he was there. After the official start of American offensive operations in 1965, his record was reviewed and he was retroactively awarded 2 Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and 2 Bronze Stars (all 3 with a V device).

If those SF troops are in Syria, they'll be involved in combat missions.
Click to expand...
That's my guess, too.

And if we are looking for an excuse to heat things up with Russia, they could be sacrificed to give us that excuse.
 
I don't know if we will be made aware of where they are stationed and working. But that could tell us something.

If it's in Western Syria, that puts them into the territory Russia is trying to stabilize for their own reasons and to aid Assad. So are they there to help against ISIS, Assad, or Russia?

If they are anywhere else, that suggests they are there to help the moderate rebels against ISIS (and maybe against Assad, except that Assad isn't as active in the east or north).

Those are very different messages.

Just to be clear . . . if those troops go into western areas to work hands on with moderate rebels, we are essentially using them (or letting the rebels use them) as human shields. We are telling Russia that if they attack "our" rebels - which Russia consider just as legitimate targets as ISIS - they risk killing US troops, with the danger of escalation that entails.
 
Last edited:
An analyst on Washington Week said that there are talks now with Russia so that there will not be an accidental bombing of our troops by Russian forces. When asked whether that means the Russians will know where our troops are, the answer was that everyone will know where everyone's forces are.

I'm assuming that ISIS will be excluded from that info sharing but how long before someone connected with the "good rebels" OR someone connected with the Russians lets that info leak to ISIS?
 
I blame ISIS for this.

You guys are arguing about the chicken and the egg...........I'm saying f*** the poultry, go straight to the source, kick the sh** out of the farmer and put him out of business. Problem solved. Then you just gotta wait for the next farmer to move in and try his hand at terrorism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawk in SEC Country
What Would Jesus Do? said:
When I first mentioned this, I was just reacting to the (fairly obvious) hints from Ashton Carter. Now it's official. What do you think?

Supposedly under 50 troops. Supposedly they won't be involved in regular combat missions.

Yeah, we know that tune.
Click to expand...

I still say ISIS is a jv team. We could put in a force of a thousand troops in Iraq and push them out. But at what cost? If it cost 200 American lives would it be worth it? I lean towards no.
 
Sooner-Be-Dead said:
I still say ISIS is a jv team. We could put in a force of a thousand troops in Iraq and push them out. But at what cost? If it cost 200 American lives would it be worth it? I lean towards no.
Click to expand...
While I'm inclined to agree, it could easily be argued that we owe it to the Iraqis to rid their country of the scourge we created. Plus maybe a $trillion or so in reparations.
 
It's really disgusting seeing one US President after another being outed as a whore for the MIC. Killing untold millions of innocent people to improve some rich assh*le's bottom line.

It's such a scam and a racket. And, it wouldn't be so bad if the cost weren't so high in human life! We're not selling super-beta-prostate supplements here, that just take peoples' money. This crap kills people, byt he hundreds of thousands.

Watch American Sniper... or any Vietnam film and realize; You WILL NOT defeat an indigenous people. Short of nuking the place, you can forget it. That is their HOME. They will fight, and become as savage as necessary, to defend their HOME! If another country's military attacked us here in the way the US Military attacks people that have not harmed them, we'd fight to the last person and use the most clandestine, insidious methods our brains could conjure-up. The hate, the lack of civility, the poverty, the mass death, would affect us for generations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuck C, shank hawk, NoleSoup4U and 2 others
strummingram said:
It's really disgusting seeing one US President after another being outed as a whore for the MIC. Killing untold millions of innocent people to improve some rich assh*le's bottom line.

It's such a scam and a racket. And, it wouldn't be so bad if the cost weren't so high in human life! We're not selling super-beta-prostate supplements here, that just take peoples' money. This crap kills people, byt he hundreds of thousands.

Watch American Sniper... or any Vietnam film and realize; You WILL NOT defeat an indigenous people. Short of nuking the place, you can forget it. That is their HOME. They will fight, and become as savage as necessary, to defend their HOME! If another country's military attacked us here in the way the US Military attacks people that have not harmed them, we'd fight to the last person and use the most clandestine, insidious methods our brains could conjure-up. The hate, the lack of civility, the poverty, the mass death, would affect us for generations.
Click to expand...
I wonder what would happen if the US military/government said f*** it and pulled their forces out of all other countries around the world and just concentrated on protecting their own boarders. No military installations or Navy ships or Air Force bases or any black sites etc etc in any other country, we just go dark to the rest of the world.

I wonder what would become of the rest of the world. I'm sure no fks would be given about what other countries do, but it's just something to think about. Because technically we don't need to be in other countries.........amirite? It's not like the American military is truly helping or anything, at least not anymore......amirite?

noidea.gif
 
EvilMonkeyInTheCloset said:
I wonder what would happen if the US military/government said f*** it and pulled their forces out of all other countries around the world and just concentrated on protecting their own boarders. No military installations or Navy ships or Air Force bases or any black sites etc etc in any other country, we just go dark to the rest of the world.

I wonder what would become of the rest of the world. I'm sure no fks would be given about what other countries do, but it's just something to think about. Because technically we don't need to be in other countries.........amirite? It's not like the American military is truly helping or anything, at least not anymore......amirite?

noidea.gif
Click to expand...
Like it or not we have an empire. I'm sure our historians can predict what will happen when we stop propping up our empire.

If we are not providing the protection and police services for the world and if we are not keeping the shipping lanes free for everyone else, a number of obvious things happen. Others try to fill that void - and control those lanes. And the people we have been bribing or threatening to maintain friendly trading relationships with us look for other partners.

American businesses no longer get the deference and the contracts they used to enjoy because of US clout. The value of the dollar as trading currency declines and the dollar first becomes just part of the basket and then, perhaps, displaced entirely.

Many around the world would be happy to be rid of us. And some may try to treat us the way we have been treating Russia. Sanctions. Encroachments. Provocations. Like Russia, we still have nukes, so they can only push us so far. But we will be under siege.

None of that is insurmountable, but it will be a strain. And I wouldn't rule out the rise of a "make America great again" fascist party, with unpleasant consequences.
 
What Would Jesus Do? said:
Like it or not we have an empire. I'm sure our historians can predict what will happen when we stop propping up our empire.

If we are not providing the protection and police services for the world and if we are not keeping the shipping lanes free for everyone else, a number of obvious things happen. Others try to fill that void - and control those lanes. And the people we have been bribing or threatening to maintain friendly trading relationships with us look for other partners.

American businesses no longer get the deference and the contracts they used to enjoy because of US clout. The value of the dollar as trading currency declines and the dollar first becomes just part of the basket and then, perhaps, displaced entirely.

Many around the world would be happy to be rid of us. And some may try to treat us the way we have been treating Russia. Sanctions. Encroachments. Provocations. Like Russia, we still have nukes, so they can only push us so far. But we will be under siege.

None of that is insurmountable, but it will be a strain. And I wouldn't rule out the rise of a "make America great again" fascist party, with unpleasant consequences.
Click to expand...
Well if that's the case then I want you to play the part of John Connors when the machines take over.

Heavy lies the crown and all, but I have faith in you.

 
  • Like
Reactions: What Would Jesus Do?
strummingram said:
It's really disgusting seeing one US President after another being outed as a whore for the MIC. Killing untold millions of innocent people to improve some rich assh*le's bottom line.

It's such a scam and a racket. And, it wouldn't be so bad if the cost weren't so high in human life! We're not selling super-beta-prostate supplements here, that just take peoples' money. This crap kills people, byt he hundreds of thousands.

Watch American Sniper... or any Vietnam film and realize; You WILL NOT defeat an indigenous people. Short of nuking the place, you can forget it. That is their HOME. They will fight, and become as savage as necessary, to defend their HOME! If another country's military attacked us here in the way the US Military attacks people that have not harmed them, we'd fight to the last person and use the most clandestine, insidious methods our brains could conjure-up. The hate, the lack of civility, the poverty, the mass death, would affect us for generations.
Click to expand...
Add on top that after we rid the middle east country of "X" we turn right around and spend billions to rebuild so they can they destroy once we uproot ourselves.

Keep the money and bodies at home, fix home first!
 
What Would Jesus Do? said:
I don't know if we will be made aware of where they are stationed and working. But that could tell us something.

If it's in Western Syria, that puts them into the territory Russia is trying to stabilize for their own reasons and to aid Assad. So are they there to help against ISIS, Assad, or Russia?

If they are anywhere else, that suggests they are there to help the moderate rebels against ISIS (and maybe against Assad, except that Assad isn't as active in the east or north).

Those are very different messages.

Just to be clear . . . if those troops go into western areas to work hands on with moderate rebels, we are essentially using them (or letting the rebels use them) as human shields. We are telling Russia that if they attack "our" rebels - which Russia consider just as legitimate targets as ISIS - they risk killing US troops, with the danger of escalation that entails.
Click to expand...
For any who may have been wondering about this, I just heard that these forces are NOT going to be near where the Russians are operating but, instead, in the northeast, working with the Kurdish forces.

I'm glad to hear this.
 
What Would Jesus Do? said:
For any who may have been wondering about this, I just heard that these forces are NOT going to be near where the Russians are operating but, instead, in the northeast, working with the Kurdish forces.

I'm glad to hear this.
Click to expand...
HAHA and who told you this, Obama?

I'll find out from my cousin on where this group is going - I will only post True or False on a response so I don't divulge where.
 
What Would Jesus Do? said:
Good question.

I worry that it's just softening us up for later expansion.

Are they sacrificial lambs (or as we say in WOBland, Sacremento lambs)?
Click to expand...
exactly. I don't want any troops there, but IMO sending in a tiny number is worse than sending 100,000. I'm no military expert though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cigaretteman

How Trump just destroyed his own Syria strategy

Replies
0
Views
113
Off Topic
cigaretteman
cigaretteman
cigaretteman

Carly Fiorina’s defense proposals ignore the facts on the ground

Replies
25
Views
477
Off Topic
Vroom_C14
Vroom_C14
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back