US readies possible solo action against Syria

Aug 30, 2013 Full story: Lincoln Daily News 25

President Barack Obama on Thursday prepared for the possibility of launching unilateral American military action against Syria within days as Britain opted out in a stunning vote by Parliament.

Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
delta

Quezon City, Philippines

#1 Aug 30, 2013
The Americans has nothing to do, but to prepare a war against Syria. Since 2007, the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel have been documented as conspiring to overthrow the Syrian government by way of sectarian extremists, including groups “sympathetic to Al Qaeda,” and in particular, the militant, sectarian Muslim Brotherhood. While the West has attempted to portray the full-scale conflict beginning in Syria in 2011 as first, a “pro-democracy uprising,” to now a “sectarian conflict,” recent atrocities carried out by US-Saudi-Israeli proxies have shifted the assault to include Sunni Muslims unable or unwilling to participate in the destruction of the Syrian state.The objective of the US sponsored armed insurgency is –with the help of Israel– to “Break Syria into Pieces”.
Old Jew

San Francisco, CA

#2 Aug 30, 2013
USA will never be alone, it has its strongest ally at its side ,Israel. We will give the USA all the moral support they need but we can not be involved directly because there are already too few of us.
Adale

Baltimore, MD

#3 Aug 30, 2013
It needs to be a nato effort not just U.S.and Britain has declined the invitation. That makes it a no go right from the start.
And besides that, why replace a dictator with something just as vile, muslim brotherhood or some other waco.
Kevin

United States

#4 Aug 30, 2013
The fundamental question still - did Asad order the chemical attack?

The safe assumption is No, until it is proven otherwise.

Soldiers from any country can do stupid things on their own!
nania

Mandalay, Myanmar

#5 Aug 30, 2013
Kevin wrote:
The fundamental question still - did Asad order the chemical attack?
The safe assumption is No, until it is proven otherwise.
Soldiers from any country can do stupid things on their own!
rule number one, Assad still has responsible for his subordinate soldiers. and he had enough time if it was happened so. but he did not. and Doctor Assad is stupid but he is not crazy enough to let this hot item to handle at those of foolish basic level soldiers. in fact, you can give proper reasoon than Assad on his case.
nania

Mandalay, Myanmar

#6 Aug 30, 2013
what should do if a chemi psycho goverment is choking dead to a thousand and almost half of inocent people included 426 children? and if other Nuki Psycho guys of the world is watching how is the international responce on this. Assad starts a call and the world must answer him such thing is never allow..
fiestylisa

United States

#7 Aug 30, 2013
I just watched on news what that psycho done to civilians again with gas.I was against it ,but now we cant stand by and watch them gas more children with severe burns,if other countries and there citizens can sit back and watch that masacre let them live with it.I cant stand to see those kids and young adults burnt.I hate war and i have changed my mind on this a thousand times,but we need to bomb the hell out of certain sites in syria.
Kevin

United States

#8 Aug 30, 2013
nania wrote:
<quoted text>rule number one, Assad still has responsible for his subordinate soldiers. and he had enough time if it was happened so. but he did not. and Doctor Assad is stupid but he is not crazy enough to let this hot item to handle at those of foolish basic level soldiers. in fact, you can give proper reasoon than Assad on his case.
Many countries actively support and provide weapons/logistics to the rebels. Now will these countries be responsible for anything rebels will do or have done (including the use of chemical weapon)?
storybook

United States

#9 Aug 30, 2013
fiestylisa wrote:
I just watched on news what that psycho done to civilians again with gas.
What news, CNN? You might as well just tune into the Free Syrian Army Gazette and get the 'story' firsthand.

Get a grip on your emotions.
storybook

United States

#10 Aug 30, 2013
When Iran was effectively countering Saddam's attack on it, Washington became very concerned and sent advisors to help him target chemical weapon attacks on the Iranians.

Even if these current allegations are true, I see no 'moral high ground' Washington can assume as some justification for an attack, as is the basket Kerry seems to be putting all his eggs in.

Not even NATO is on board with this, just goes to show you how much credibility and influence we've lost over the last few decades. Ask yourself why.
storybook

United States

#11 Aug 30, 2013
nania wrote:
<quoted text>rule number one, Assad still has responsible for his subordinate soldiers.
A false and convenient argument, same one that was oft' selectively heard in the 90's when Balkan command and control could not be established.

That means that Bush or Obama would be responsible for every US soldier that went berserk and annihilated Afghan or Iraqi civilians and is (or is not) sitting in prison right now. Or that Clinton would be directly responsible for the ethnic cleansing and civilian massacres that the Croats perpetrated with our help during Operation Storm.

Same thing with the Geneva Convention. You can't invoke it as condemnation if you yourself have not adhered to it in the past. We still close our eyes and try though, time and again.

If one applies universal arguments selectively, then one might as well not apply them at all. It does our credibility no good whatsoever and you're seeing the inevitable results in UK, NATO etc. intransigence now.

PS: CNN just flashed on the screen "Chemical Weapons use threatens US National Security."

Well, of course it does. It does if and when al Qaeda linked rebels get their hands on them. It does not when Syria retains control over them, unless the US attacks and it, still doubtfully, decides to do what its never done in the past, attack the US directly or even attack Israel with them through Hezbollah."

So these spurious arguments may at their worst, be designed to be self-fulfilling prophesies and at their best, only serve to increase the chances ten fold that al Qaeda linked groups will get their hands on major supplies of them.

This is a very stupid and poorly thought out venture, strictly meant to 'save face' and with little thought to the aftermath. Make no mistake about it.
William

Stourbridge, UK

#12 Aug 30, 2013
This solo action is about restoring some egos to SA & Qatar after spending billions trying regime change in Syria,just to annoy Iran after loosing Iraq to the Shiites.

Obama was precautious but fell in this trap with the help of panicked Israel after this CW episode ,not to mention that Hezbullah help to SAA has driven SA and Israel crazy.
If USA has decided to go ahead with bombing Syria,this is going to open the door to hell for the Gulf,and it will be the end of their monarchy and well on time.
slam dunk

United States

#13 Aug 30, 2013
Bye Bye, Royal Pain in the Arse family.

Let's keep our powder dry to deal with the al Qaeda aftermath there. Red Adair, get your hoses to the ready.
Zig Marley

Huntington, NY

#14 Aug 30, 2013
One second here. Obama stood by for years and did nothing while the Assad regime retaliated against the armed rebels, killing and wounding thousands, both fighters and innocents. But now, because of this chemical attack allegation against the Assad regime, where more Syrians were killed and wounded, Obama NOW wants to step in and launch an attack. This scenario stinks to high heaven.
Kevin

United States

#15 Aug 30, 2013
Let's come up with an immediate proper response, assuming it is true that we know some Syrian army unit the deployed chemical weapon, but can't prove motive beyond that. Go to U.N. assembly to come up with a resolution to bring those individuals of that army unit to face trial (I bet this resolution will pass unanimously). During the trial, if it is found out that Asad or high Syrian command structure ordered the attack, then at that point, Russia and China can't veto a more punitive resolution.

Still I don't think war is necessary anyway since many countries had used chemical weapons in the past and got away with that.
Anonymous

London, UK

#16 Aug 30, 2013
fiestylisa wrote:
I just watched on news what that psycho done to civilians again with gas.I was against it ,but now we cant stand by and watch them gas more children with severe burns,if other countries and there citizens can sit back and watch that masacre let them live with it.I cant stand to see those kids and young adults burnt.I hate war and i have changed my mind on this a thousand times,but we need to bomb the hell out of certain sites in syria.
I just read some news that throws a very different light on who MIGHT be responsible!

he U.S. and its allies may be targeting the wrong culprit.

Interviews with people in Damascus and Ghouta, a suburb of the Syrian capital, where the humanitarian agency Doctors Without Borders said at least 355 people had died last week from what it believed to be a neurotoxic agent, appear to indicate as much.

The U.S., Britain, and France as well as the Arab League have accused the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for carrying out the chemical weapons attack, which mainly targeted civilians. U.S. warships are stationed in the Mediterranean Sea to launch military strikes against Syria in punishment for carrying out a massive chemical weapons attack. The U.S. and others are not interested in examining any contrary evidence, with U.S Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that Assad’s guilt was “a judgment … already clear to the world.”

However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.

“My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.

Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside of a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”

Ghouta townspeople said the rebels were using mosques and private houses to sleep while storing their weapons in tunnels.

“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K.’“We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.

A well-known rebel leader in Ghouta named ‘J’ agreed.“Jabhat al-Nusra militants do not cooperate with other rebels, except with fighting on the ground. They do not share secret information. They merely used some ordinary rebels to carry and operate this material,” he said.

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,”‘J’ said.
cirockone chuckie

Brooklyn, NY

#17 Aug 30, 2013
The west will strike syria so the hezbollah will strike israel and the west wont put ground troops but instead have israel to go to war with syria bad choice that going to put the region in flamed the ball its on the bunny obama to start the war game
ocxz

Saint-denis, Reunion

#18 Aug 30, 2013
delta wrote:
The Americans has nothing to do, but to prepare a war against Syria. Since 2007, the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel have been documented as conspiring to overthrow the Syrian government by way of sectarian extremists, including groups “sympathetic to Al Qaeda,” and in particular, the militant, sectarian Muslim Brotherhood. While the West has attempted to portray the full-scale conflict beginning in Syria in 2011 as first, a “pro-democracy uprising,” to now a “sectarian conflict,” recent atrocities carried out by US-Saudi-Israeli proxies have shifted the assault to include Sunni Muslims unable or unwilling to participate in the destruction of the Syrian state.The objective of the US sponsored armed insurgency is –with the help of Israel– to “Break Syria into Pieces”.
Good summary of the decorum.
Third Coast

Houston, TX

#19 Aug 31, 2013
In spite of recent rants to the contrary, Israel will do surprisingly well in World War III. Militaries should start mobilizing on a global scale sometime in October.
Ozy

Sunnybank, Australia

#21 Aug 31, 2013
Old Jew wrote:
USA will never be alone, it has its strongest ally at its side ,Israel. We will give the USA all the moral support they need but we can not be involved directly because there are already too few of us.
bloody us big heads you are so gutless

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

World News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Manga gateway to Japanese culture for Taiwan yo... 3 min WOMPIGCHAVAMIDEBD... 15
Australian women 'joining IS foreign fighters' 3 min Foo 10
Islam Will Conquer Italy and the Entire West (Sep '10) 6 min Albus Dumbledore 401,764
7 People Obama Has Agreed to Meet With 12 min TheAfroHedgehog 1
Once more on fascism knocking on the Balkan doo... (Aug '09) 13 min Albanian hater 2,175
No Muslim can think of profaning holy Prophet (... (Jan '11) 14 min number four 53,534
US officials: Netanyahu using Congress speech o... 19 min Too sad for words 9
More from around the web