Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs

Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Phydeaux -> Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/5/2013 8:59:32 PM)
With utterly predictable results, Obama traded US involvement for Syrian Chemical weapons. The Syrians have thus switch to equally devastating Fuel Air bombs, presumably supplied the the soviets. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/846e3599724e A link to show you just how horrifying these weapons can be: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermobaric_weapon

Politesub53 -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 4:20:53 AM)
This is the same place that was attacked back at the start of August. That said, if it is a new attack, are you suggesting Obama was wrong to act on chemical weapons. I would just like to add I havent seen you post on the bombings still going on in Iraq, ten years on...... Still think its "Mission accomplished" ?

tweakabelle -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 5:06:02 AM)
The first post seems to have been written under the misapprehension that someone or somebody in Syria could actually care what the US says or does. In which case, the obvious question is who? Assad? No chance. Assad's Iranian backers? Hardly. Assad's Hezbollah allies? Fat chance. Assad's arms supplier in chief in Moscow? Pull the other leg. The Opposition/rebels? They're allied to Al Quada. The neighbours? Israel takes all the US money arms and diplomatic protection it can get but sticks US advice or counsel where the monkey stuck his nuts. The Saudis or the Gulf tinpotentates? They're busy financing and arming AQ in Syria. The Egyptians are a bit too preoccupied with their own troubles to bother paying attention to any one else's at the moment. The Lebanese have Hezbollah in their governing coalition. So, please advise us precisely which party to the conflict is paying any attention to anything Washington says or does?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 6:12:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The first post seems to have been written under the misapprehension that someone or somebody in Syria could actually care what the US says or does. In which case, the obvious question is who? Assad? No chance. Assad's Iranian backers? Hardly. Assad's Hezbollah allies? Fat chance. Assad's arms supplier in chief in Moscow? Pull the other leg. The Opposition/rebels? They're allied to Al Quada. The neighbours? Israel takes all the US money arms and diplomatic protection it can get but sticks US advice or counsel where the monkey stuck his nuts. The Saudis or the Gulf tinpotentates? They're busy financing and arming AQ in Syria. The Egyptians are a bit too preoccupied with their own troubles to bother paying attention to any one else's at the moment. The Lebanese have Hezbollah in their governing coalition. So, please advise us precisely which party to the conflict is paying any attention to anything Washington says or does? All the more reason for the US to relieve itself of active involvement in the Middle East. Sure wish one party would support that choice (meaning neither party supports that choice).

DsBound -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 6:27:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri All the more reason for the US to relieve itself of active involvement in the Middle East. Sure wish one party would support that choice (meaning neither party supports that choice). Couldn't agree more... spot on!

Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 7:00:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 This is the same place that was attacked back at the start of August. That said, if it is a new attack, are you suggesting Obama was wrong to act on chemical weapons. I would just like to add I havent seen you post on the bombings still going on in Iraq, ten years on...... Still think its "Mission accomplished" ? Nice derail. Since the moderators don't seem to care about thread drift I'll answer your post. Iraq was a devestatingly stupid operation. Much was, despite your snivelous contempt, attempted with a good heart. Schools for girls. Democratic reforms. But the idea that you can uplife democracy on a culture on the cheap was stupid. The idea that there might be political unanimity until the task was accomplished was stupid. The idea that democrats who voted for the war might remain faithful until reforms took root and not make political hay until the task was accomplished was naive. The execution was ridiculous until petraeus came in. Such an example of top down thinking. The leaders are safe..forget about the people . There can be no civics in a country in civil war. Security must come first - after which all else flows. Proof again of mao's precept.

VideoAdminGamma -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 8:52:10 AM)
Thread drift are minor side stories that do not actually hijack a topic. Hijacking is making comments that have nothing to do with the topic or thread drift that has grown into a hijack. Thank you for being a part of CollarMe, Gamma quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Nice derail. Since the moderators don't seem to care about thread drift I'll answer your post.

Owner59 -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 10:14:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The first post seems to have been written under the misapprehension that someone or somebody in Syria could actually care what the US says or does. In which case, the obvious question is who? Assad? No chance. Assad's Iranian backers? Hardly. Assad's Hezbollah allies? Fat chance. Assad's arms supplier in chief in Moscow? Pull the other leg. The Opposition/rebels? They're allied to Al Quada. The neighbours? Israel takes all the US money arms and diplomatic protection it can get but sticks US advice or counsel where the monkey stuck his nuts. The Saudis or the Gulf tinpotentates? They're busy financing and arming AQ in Syria. The Egyptians are a bit too preoccupied with their own troubles to bother paying attention to any one else's at the moment. The Lebanese have Hezbollah in their governing coalition. So, please advise us precisely which party to the conflict is paying any attention to anything Washington says or does? All the more reason for the US to relieve itself of active involvement in the Middle East. Sure wish one party would support that choice (meaning neither party supports that choice). Unless you want rushia/china and every Islamic fundie filling the vacuum, that`s not a good idea. The Iran thing,protecting Israel,making Libya stable and free,kicking ass like with this week ends raid and many other worthy efforts would not be possible if we pulled out.

RottenJohnny -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 10:57:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Unless you want rushia/china and every Islamic fundie filling the vacuum, that`s not a good idea. The Iran thing,protecting Israel,making Libya stable and free,kicking ass like with this week ends raid and many other worthy efforts would not be possible if we pulled out. Next thing you know, you'll be suggesting we should have stayed in Iraq.

Owner59 -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 11:18:26 AM)
We should do good where we can and not do evil otherwise..... like opening torture centers in Iraq, after lying us into invading it.... Just a slight distinction....

RottenJohnny -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 11:43:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 We should do good where we can and not do evil otherwise..... like opening torture centers in Iraq, after lying us into invading it.... Just a slight distinction.... It's always easy to draw a distinction after a fact.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 3:27:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The first post seems to have been written under the misapprehension that someone or somebody in Syria could actually care what the US says or does. In which case, the obvious question is who? Assad? No chance. Assad's Iranian backers? Hardly. Assad's Hezbollah allies? Fat chance. Assad's arms supplier in chief in Moscow? Pull the other leg. The Opposition/rebels? They're allied to Al Quada. The neighbours? Israel takes all the US money arms and diplomatic protection it can get but sticks US advice or counsel where the monkey stuck his nuts. The Saudis or the Gulf tinpotentates? They're busy financing and arming AQ in Syria. The Egyptians are a bit too preoccupied with their own troubles to bother paying attention to any one else's at the moment. The Lebanese have Hezbollah in their governing coalition. So, please advise us precisely which party to the conflict is paying any attention to anything Washington says or does? All the more reason for the US to relieve itself of active involvement in the Middle East. Sure wish one party would support that choice (meaning neither party supports that choice). Unless you want rushia/china and every Islamic fundie filling the vacuum, that`s not a good idea. The Iran thing,protecting Israel,making Libya stable and free,kicking ass like with this week ends raid and many other worthy efforts would not be possible if we pulled out. We don't need to be there to have Israel's back. We don't need to be making anyone stable and free. We can send in the SEALs pretty much any time we really want to. "Islamic fundies" are already filling the vacuum. I welcome Russia and China getting sand in their shorts. Let them take the irritation and money drain.

Politesub53 -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 4:02:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 This is the same place that was attacked back at the start of August. That said, if it is a new attack, are you suggesting Obama was wrong to act on chemical weapons. I would just like to add I havent seen you post on the bombings still going on in Iraq, ten years on...... Still think its "Mission accomplished" ? Nice derail. Since the moderators don't seem to care about thread drift I'll answer your post. Iraq was a devestatingly stupid operation. Much was, despite your snivelous contempt, attempted with a good heart. Schools for girls. Democratic reforms. But the idea that you can uplife democracy on a culture on the cheap was stupid. The idea that there might be political unanimity until the task was accomplished was stupid. The idea that democrats who voted for the war might remain faithful until reforms took root and not make political hay until the task was accomplished was naive. The execution was ridiculous until petraeus came in. Such an example of top down thinking. The leaders are safe..forget about the people . There can be no civics in a country in civil war. Security must come first - after which all else flows. Proof again of mao's precept. No derail from me, since I was pointing out inconsistenies. WTF do you mean good heart, are you suggesting Obama didnt have "good heart" when trying to stop the use of chemical weapons. Well buddy, I am so snivelous I will point out there is no security in Iraq, and hasnt been since the misnamed Operation Iraqi Freedom.

jlf1961 -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 4:11:02 PM)
Sorry but the Syrians have been using these devices for some time, in fact one right wing conservative group claimed the explosions video taped and put on their website indicated that the US and Israel were using nukes in Syria. This is no worse than the US use of specialized bombs designed for the B36 Peacemaker in Vietnam. They modified the bombs with a 32 foot probe on the end nose of the weapon and use parachute extraction to pull it from a C130. The probe detonated the weapon above ground knocking down trees, huts, any thing else standing, and the over pressure basically turned people and animals into red mist. The idea was to create Landing Zones for Air Mobile units.

Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 5:49:56 PM)
The point people is that the huge line in the sand to remove syria's chemical weapons was useless. It accomplished nothing - albeit with much sound and fury.

Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 6:01:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 This is the same place that was attacked back at the start of August. That said, if it is a new attack, are you suggesting Obama was wrong to act on chemical weapons. I would just like to add I havent seen you post on the bombings still going on in Iraq, ten years on...... Still think its "Mission accomplished" ? Nice derail. Since the moderators don't seem to care about thread drift I'll answer your post. Iraq was a devestatingly stupid operation. Much was, despite your snivelous contempt, attempted with a good heart. Schools for girls. Democratic reforms. But the idea that you can uplife democracy on a culture on the cheap was stupid. The idea that there might be political unanimity until the task was accomplished was stupid. The idea that democrats who voted for the war might remain faithful until reforms took root and not make political hay until the task was accomplished was naive. The execution was ridiculous until petraeus came in. Such an example of top down thinking. The leaders are safe..forget about the people . There can be no civics in a country in civil war. Security must come first - after which all else flows. Proof again of mao's precept. No derail from me, since I was pointing out inconsistenies. WTF do you mean good heart, are you suggesting Obama didnt have "good heart" when trying to stop the use of chemical weapons. Well buddy, I am so snivelous I will point out there is no security in Iraq, and hasnt been since the misnamed Operation Iraqi Freedom. Since you missed it - Iraq was poorly planned, poorly executed. And there was no possibility of the democrats not making political hay on it. So the pull out of Iraq, and the ongoing one in Afghanistan have lead to pretty much disaster. Iraq is flowing downhill into a civil war with terrorists on the one side. The same terrorists have burgeoned and are now in control of much of ethiopia, somalia, nigeria, mali, libya, iraq, afghanistan, and oh yes, syria. What do you suppose will happen when the Iraq falls to sharia law? When islamic militants train openly in iran, iraq, afghanistan, syria... What will you liberal democrats do then; propose then?

TheHeretic -> RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs (10/6/2013 6:12:27 PM)
Well, there is more than enough meat on the bone for a separate discussion on the failure of the Obama administration to negotiate a SOFA in Iraq, and what obligations we still own there, as a result of Bush getting his war approved. If somebody wants to start it, I might even show up, time and interest permitting. To the subject at hand though, I didn't think intervention was our job in Syria when chemical weapons were used, I don't think it is our job when Assad uses really nasty weapons that aren't banned. Now, if anybody was deluding themselves into thinking that President Obama had somehow made the civil war in Syria more humane through his cow on roller skates diplomat efforts, and his riding to the rescue lessons from Putin, this might force them deeper into some amusing denial, but otherwise, it isn't all that surprising. [image]local://upfiles/409734/08BFFC88471E45C29426C69F73C35CC7.jpg[/image]

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875