All the buzz today and over the weekend


Should the US now get involved ?

You'll have to be more specific. I don't watch the news on the weekends.

You'll have to be more specific. I don't watch the news on the weekends.

ditto

All the buzz today and over the weekend


Should the US now get involved ?

No and hell no and #### no. Of course not. It is none of our business, not even a little bit. It has zero bearing on OUR national interests and we will probably start drone strikes by the weekend. It will serve Obama's personal interests to start killing a few Syrians so, bombs away, baby! This would be an indictment if his opponent, Mitt, were not similarly addle brained about what is and isn't a US national interest.

Any bets on when we start hearing about all the Iraqi WMD and other stuff that went into Syria when we invaded Iraq with our 2 legged stool plan back in '03?

Bill Clinton says Rwanada was his biggest regret, not intervening. Frankly, it was one of his better moments from a leadership and strength perspective; he chose to do the right thing from a US national interest standpoint and stood strong.

[sorry I was posting from my iPad @ 0515 this am from bed, WMAL was talking about the matter in the 500 - 515 segment]


After the Horrible Massacre this past week, Pol's [specifically quoted on WMAL John McSame] were making the rounds on the Sunday Morning Talk Shows, commenting we can NO Longer Stand by and watch .......



Personally I could care less about what one 3rd rate dictator does, but it would leave a vacuum for further Islamist Expansion ....... kinda like all the nasty dictators the US supported during the Cold WAR ...... it kept the Soviet threat at bay


and maybe this is all because 'Islamists' have stirred up a hornets nest, trying to follow the path of Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt

we should not spill any more of our Blood for these people ....... let them live or die by their own choices ........ maybe supply them with some surplus Ak's from Cold War Stocks

NO Advisers, No Boots on the ground ........ they will turn on the US as soon as they are free to do so [Assads Boot off of their neck]

Let Hexbollah and Hamas Help them out ..........

Dempsey: Syria 'atrocities' may trigger military action (http://times247.com/articles/general-syria-atrocities-could-trigger-military-action)


The escalating "atrocities" in Syria could end up triggering a military intervention, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey told Fox News on Monday — following the massacre that left more than 100 dead.

The international community has scrambled to respond to the violence over the weekend, with the recognition that an international peace plan has failed to stem the fighting. The U.N. Security Council called an emergency session Sunday, with its members unanimously supporting a statement condemning the killings and blaming the Bashar al-Assad regime.

No for about three reasons -

1. It's just clearly not at all in our national interest. We have nothing to gain from it, and possibly a lot to lose.

2. Russia still hasn't come over from the dark side. They're still spinning the story in their country as though the whole revolution thing is just a bunch of agitators, and the whole thing ought to be shut down. Try to imagine how we'd feel if say, the Russians intervened during the Rodney King riots - on behalf of the *rioters*. That's how they're telling the story. It ain't so - Syria is a weapons client and that's how they want it.

3. We're not invited. When the Hungarians pleaded for the Americans to come - we didn't. When the Panamanians pleaded for us to come - we did. But we were asked to intervene.

These situations COULD change.

1. Syria could pose a threat to others in the area, thus making #1 relevant.
2. Russia could relent and tell the UN Security Council, ok, we're in, let's kick their asses. If so, it would be a UN thing, in which case we would probably go although we shouldn't. UN police actions usually go badly.
3. If they ask us. They won't, but if they ask us, we might.

All the buzz today and over the weekend


Should the US now get involved ?
no. It won't change anything and we'll be despised by the survivors in either case.

Syria: Netanyahu Highlights Iran Connection (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/05/29/Syria-Netanyahu-Highlights-Iran-Connection?)



Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has linked Iran and its Lebanese client, the terrorist group Hezbollah, to the massacre of innocent civilians in Syria. In a statement issued by Netanyahu's office on May 27, the prime minister declared: "Iran and Hezbollah are an inseparable part of the Syrian atrocities and the world needs to act against them."

The Syrian opposition would seem to agree. Sources told Israel's left-wing Ha'aretz daily that North Korea and Russia continue to send arms to the regime of Bashar al-Assad--weapons that are funded by Iran.

The Assad regime is one of Iran's most important clients, and provides the Tehran regime a layer of military and diplomatic insulation, as well as assisting Hezbollah with weapons and logistical support. The collapse of the Syrian dictatorship might mean greater uncertainty for the Arab world, but a definite setback for Iran and its regional ambitions.

Depends...

can we find a way to overthrow the current regime and put the Taliban or Al Queada in charge?

If so, than that's a RESOUNDING yes.. Meets all of the current administrations criteria for the loss of American lives..