Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/5/2013 8:59:32 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline 		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
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 4:20:53 AM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline 		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" ?

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 5:06:02 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline 		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?



< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 10/6/2013 5:08:19 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 6:12:23 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
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).


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 6:27:06 AM   
DsBound


Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
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!

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 7:00:42 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
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.

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 8:52:10 AM   
VideoAdminGamma


Posts: 2233
Status: offline 		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.





_____________________________

"The administration has the authority to handle situations in whatever manner they feel to be in the best interests of the forum, at that moment, in response to that event. "

http://www.collarchat.com/m_72/tm.htm

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 10:14:05 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
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.




_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 10:57:20 AM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline
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.

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 11:18:26 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		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....








_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to RottenJohnny)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 11:43:38 AM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline
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.

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 3:27:47 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
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.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 4:02:32 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
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.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 4:11:02 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		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.



_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 5:49:56 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline 		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.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 6:01:03 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
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?

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs - 10/6/2013 6:12:27 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		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.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Obama Debacle: Syrians switch to Fuel Air Bombs Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125