With all this talk of Assad dispersing his forces in reponse to Obama's threats, it's got me wondering whether that's actually the US plan - presumably the regime forces are more vulnerable to rebel "interference" if they are spread out and away from barracks? Although quite why we want to help the rebels is anyone's guess.

Do you think if we could wind the clock back to 2011, we'd tell the restive Syrian populace to sit tight and enjoy the relative stability of life in their police state? I think we just might.

Lonewolf:

It will... No matter how you cut it the 14th century retards somewhere will use it as an excuse to keep going. They'll kill people who don't deserve to be killed in the name of some sky pixie and we'll be forced to put boots down somewhere eventually. In the end our worthless politicians only end up killing good people when they begin addressing foreign policy. Personally, I'd rather have the direct approach. Go firmly to war with any country that does not turn over all their Islamists to us immediately, no equivocation. And yes, for people like Broadsword, if they'll have me, I'll volunteer.

Broadsword:

Flying over people, fixing and loading aircraft or stacking blankets doesn't really count. Bullets winging by and IED's would get my respect.

High Spirits:

Along with the belief in a supreme being the fallacy that human life matters is just that, a fallacy.... Ask any hungry bear, tiger or shark.

What is going on in Washington DC is an insult to our intelligence.


Mssrs Clausewitz and Tsu understood there was exactly one message to be sent to your Enemies. Surrender or Die. What other message do we need to send.

Every time we have ignored the teachings of those two.....we lose.

Here we go again!

Go firmly to war with any country that does not turn over all their Islamists to us immediately, no equivocation.

I think someone was reading a little too much 'Richard the Lionheart' when he was younger. Crusades are so High Middle Ages. Though I guess they were fun. I have dibs on the Cross of St George ceramic armour plates!

Sorry I can't fulfil your jerk-off fantasies.

Wow, that just dismissed the contribution from a large proportion of our military.

Forgive me for singling you out, HS, but the answer to this oft-repeated question for a significant number of the political players is 'watching with horror, saying "this must never, ever happen again" and coming up with nascent ideas pertaining to Responsibility to Protect and liberal interventionism.'

The inaction in Rwanda can't be used as a comparison - we did nothing then, so why now?- because of what it led to; it helped to create many of the current 'I want military action' brigade, who contended that human life really did matter, and that we mustn't be found wanting again. Circumstance (spelt 'P-U-T-I-N') might be said to have prevented anything being done until now, but crossing the threshold of using a weapon type barred by international treaty seems to have given the would-be interventionists the foundation for arguing that the responsibility to protect has reached the point where UNSC Resolutions, etc, have to be regarded as 'nice to have', since there's now an imperative to intervene that was lacking before.

That's not me justifying intervention, BTW, merely endeavouring to offer a view on why there is a body of opinion which strongly endorses the idea, including some people whose political opinions appear to make them unlikely members of such a corpus.

AA:

It may play out as you say, boots on ground, or it may not. The political will to "put boots on ground" in Syria is not merely weak, my analysis of the latest round of posturing is that it is utterly absent.

What is going on smacks of Clintonian (and futile) lobbing of high explosives to send a message. The message is "we sort of care, here's how much" and then ... silence?

Hanoijane:

I say, how crass... Henry V old chap, Henry V... If it isn't Shakespeare it's mere fiction...

Broadsword:

I might have a "little stroking" thing over an actual broadsword for it is a weapon of war to be used judiciously in the overall policy of a country... The moment you started typing you came up wanting...

Toadstool:

A large proportion of the military contribute in a fine way yet from a position of safety. My comments are not designed to denigrate anyone's service but rather to shed light on the armchair warriors like Broadsword who would happily send men and women into combat, (a place they avoided), to give their leftist feeling of worth some twisted credibility....

For over a year I have been harping about General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff....suggesting he is a buffoon of the lowest order.

I was criticized by most for taking ol' Martin....who I consider to be Obama's Boy....but perhaps this exchange today when he was testifying about our strategic goals in Syria....but was unable to say what it was we were actually trying to accomplish.

This is our most Senior Military Leader in the county.....he is the Top Dog....and when called before Congress.....this is the very best answer the Moron can come up with as we seem to be getting ready to go to War with Syria?

Jesus....this is getting so sad it makes one want to cry.....or Shoulder Pitch Forks and drag out some Fence Rails after gathering up a bucket of Tar and a bag of feathers.


Dempsey Can't Say What U.S. is Seeking in Syria | Washington Free Beacon

Keep digging AA. The only thing you've shed light on is your own ignorance and stupidity.

Well - looks like it's going to be a yes vote now that Pelosi, Boehner, McCain et al have swung in behind Obama.

AA,

Your thoughts 'are as two grains of wheat hidden in two bushels of chaff; you shall seek all day ere you find them, and when you have them they are not worth the search'.

Not from Henry V but seem appropriate nevertheless...

Damn those armchair warriors, especially that McCain guy!

Utter utter nonsense, never mind the contradiction in the philosophy.

Utter utter nonsense, never mind the contradiction in the philosophy.

Oh, leave him be. Whether he admits it or not, he's been gorging on popcorn.

It is isn't it. I may be so wrong on this but don't they have a history of making a lot of noise but hold off getting involved. Like I say I may be wrong, and stand by to be corrected, but when was the last time they actually intervened in an op we were involved in. Kosovo- Pristina?

Much as they would like to keep their foothold in the Med, the Russians can probably see the writing on the wall. The evidence regarding chemical weapons and who used them is becoming pretty overwhelming. In the circs, they can hardly keep saying 'nyet' and remain credible, let alone contemplate taking any military action in Assad's favour.

Hanoi:

Merchant of Venice... A fine play... ;)

Tom:

No-one "deserves to be killed" until they start doing nasty things to others... But, in the end, human life is irrelevant in the "superior to all other creatures" way many see ourselves. You need to learn to separate your feelings from logic and good sense, you look such a twit when you "think" with your heart.

Broadsword:

My ignorance and stupidity is rife in the mind of the likes of you... Without saying, up front, what it was you did for 25 years you have all the credibility of the armchair warrior you seem to be... Fess up or shut up... It's that simple.... anything else makes you look evasive and, frankly, childish.

AA.

I knew you'd get it. Just for fun, huh? :-)