War with Syria

S

Soysauceonrice_sl

shitlord
558
0
khalid_sl said:
Having your bluff called is when you threaten a military strike if something happens and then pass the buck to congress, all while having your Secretary of State go around saying that the strikes will be "unbelievably small".

Syria agreed to this deal because not only does it take off the table strikes in return for chemical action, but effectively takes off the board strikes any time in the future and gives their ally Putin a political victory. Also, they aren't going to give up their chemical weapons. At best they might give up some of their older weapons that aren't useable anymore. This is a huge win for Syria and Russia diplomatically and the US gets nothing.
Click to expand...
No. Calling a bluff would require some action on Syria's part (the party calling the bluff) to goad Obama into attacking them, because they don't think the threat of attack is genuine. Signing the CWC and agreeing to turn over chemical weapons is a sign of appeasement to prevent the threatened strikes -- it is the exact opposite of calling someone's bluff. Your description, describing actions taken by Obama, has nothing to do with anything Syria has done, and is in no way anyone calling anyone's bluff.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Soysauceonrice_sl said:
No. Calling a bluff would require some action on Syria's part (the party calling the bluff)
Click to expand...
They did call the bluff, they used chemical weapons after the red line.. Sorry, I left that out of my post because I thought you were smart enough to remember that. I'll edit to my post so next time you won't have to use your memory.
 
S

Soysauceonrice_sl

shitlord
558
0
khalid_sl said:
They did call the bluff, they used chemical weapons after the red line.. Sorry, I left that out of my post because I thought you were smart enough to remember that. I'll edit to my post so next time you won't have to use your memory.
Click to expand...
Uh huh, so invoke your memory and tell me where Obama said the red line = we will kick you out. Here,I'll help you out.

Summary: Syria is in the middle of a civil war. The U.S. wants nothing to do with it. But if chemical weapons become an issue, such as the possibility of them falling into the wrong hands, then the U.S. military might have to get involved. THAT was his red line. You interpreting red line = we take out Assad is, frankly, stupid. The facts don't support that.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Soysauceonrice_sl said:
You interpreting red line = we take out Assad is, frankly, stupid. The facts don't support that.
Click to expand...
Who the fuck said the red line was Assad getting taken out? Why do you just make shit up? The red line was a threat of military action of some sort if chemical weapons were used. Chemical weapons were used, Obama then talked about it and then passed the buck to congress. Not only did he pass the buck, but then he kept talking down how big the strike was going to be just in case he had to do one.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Also, please note that I was against military involvement in this conflict also. However, when the president starts laying out red lines he starts putting US diplomatic prestige on the line. That is the problem, he should have been smart enough to stay out of this civil war in the first place. He wasn't, he made a bluff and was called on it. It took the russian's to offer a paper deal that will never be followed through to let him save some face.
 
S

Soysauceonrice_sl

shitlord
558
0
khalid_sl said:
Who the fuck said the red line was Assad getting taken out? Why do you just make shit up? The red line was a threat of military action of some sort if chemical weapons were used. Chemical weapons were used, Obama then talked about it and then passed the buck to congress. Not only did he pass the buck, but then he kept talking down how big the strike was going to be just in case he had to do one.
Click to expand...
Are you even fucking following this thread ? Or do you just see me post something, see red, and just let fly ?

I said Obama was never going to strike to get rid of Assad (regime change). The point was that the strikes, if they ever occurred, would be targeted at taking out Assad's CW.

Aladain replied SPECIFICALLY to my regime change statement, saying if that was never the intent, then they should have never threatened it.

I replied, saying that the IT (regime change) was never threatened -- only military strikes.

That's where your stupid ass jumped in and kept crowing about red lines and threats. What the fuck are we even arguing about ?
 
S

Soysauceonrice_sl

shitlord
558
0
khalid_sl said:
Also, please note that I was against military involvement in this conflict also. However, when the president starts laying out red lines he starts putting US diplomatic prestige on the line. That is the problem, he should have been smart enough to stay out of this civil war in the first place. He wasn't, he made a bluff and was called on it. It took the russian's to offer a paper deal that will never be followed through to let him save some face.
Click to expand...
Go read that article I linked. The original fear was the instability of the country and CW falling into the wrong hands. IF the deal goes through as planned, then that fear is null. That's a win. But of course, you'll crow about how BUT THE DEAL IS ILLUSORY IT WON'T REALLY BE EFFECTIVE IN GETTING RID OF HIS CHEMICAL WEAPONS. Yea, and a strike wouldn't be guaranteed to get rid of the chemical weapons either. It's the better of 2 shitty alternatives.
 
S

Soysauceonrice_sl

shitlord
558
0
khalid_sl said:
Why don't YOU read the article I linked. It shows that regardless of whether he turns over the weapons it is a win for Assad.
Click to expand...
I read it. It's a well written article, but its opinion. Debating opinions can be fun, but it's time consuming and I don't want to do that on a Sunday. And I already addressed one issue that your article didn't -- he only cares about what happens in Syria. Assad losing his chemical weapons has impact outside of just Syria, mainly in Israel. Considering that is our #1 ally in the region, you'd think your article would pay some lip service to how it affects them.

My article isn't opinion, it just quotes what Obama said AND THE QUESTION HE WAS INITIALLY RESPONDING TO. It's objective fact, not opinion.

khalid_sl said:
That is the problem, you don't know what you are arguing about. You are actually arguing that Obama's bluff wasn't called. Which is stupid.
Click to expand...
No, YOU'RE stupid.
 
Erronius

Erronius

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
16,461
42,372
khalid_sl said:
Considering how you are one of the very few people that still seem to somehow think Obama came out looking good in all this, I'll take being called stupid by a pedantic moron like you as a compliment.
Click to expand...
dalema.jpg
 
S

Soysauceonrice_sl

shitlord
558
0
khalid_sl said:
Considering how you are one of the very few people that still seem to somehow think Obama came out looking good in all this, I'll take being called stupid by a pedantic moron like you as a compliment.
Click to expand...
Lol. Lose your shit much ? It's a Sunday. Grab a beer, watch some football, and wipe off the froth off your mouth, it's embarrassing.
 
Erronius

Erronius

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
16,461
42,372
Does anyone ever really use the left-hand rule for electron flow and direction of a magnetic field?

Srsly.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Soysauceonrice_sl said:
Tell me again how Obama should have done what you think he shouldn't do bro.
Click to expand...
He shouldn't have gotten us involved in a war between Assad and Al-Qaeda. If you are going to try and involve yourself, don't bluff and flounder around looking like an idiot. Also, get rid of John Kerry as secretary of state.
 
S

Soysauceonrice_sl

shitlord
558
0
khalid_sl said:
He shouldn't have gotten us involved in a war between Assad and Al-Qaeda.
Click to expand...
He didn't, that's a win right ?

khalid_sl said:
If you are going to try and involve yourself, don't bluff and flounder around looking like an idiot. Also, get rid of John Kerry as secretary of state..
Click to expand...
This is Obama's "bluff".

Obama_sl said:
I have, at this point, not ordered military engagement in the situation. But the point that you made about chemical and biological weapons is critical. That?s an issue that doesn?t just concern Syria; it concerns our close allies in the region, including Israel. It concerns us. We cannot have a situation where chemical or biological weapons are falling into the hands of the wrong people.

We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.
Click to expand...
It was in response to this question:

Reporter_sl said:
Mr. President, could you update us on your latest thinking of where you think things are in Syria, and in particular, whether you envision using U.S. military, if simply for nothing else, the safe keeping of the chemical weapons, and if you?re confident that the chemical weapons are safe?
Click to expand...
So point me to the word, line, or phrase, that you find objectionable. I don't want your bullshit interpretations -- point me to what exactly, in that quote, Obama said that he shouldn't have said when prompted with that question, or how YOU, oh Khalid master armchair statesman, would have responded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.