Syria

2008-10-27 00:46:31

#1

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6834|Global Command

A U.S. official confirmed the attack targeted what he said were elements of arobust foreign fighter logistics network operating in Syria and that due to Syrian inaction the U.S. was now "taking matters into our own hands."

http://apnews.myway.com//article/200810 … I6481.html

I don't know what to say. After more than six years I guess one could say it's about time.

I would refer people to the U.S. economy. Machinist making parts for planes and munitions companies are doing great, but the real economy can't seem to support endless billions on the wacky Islamic ass kicking adventures.

Not unless we take their gas.

2008-10-27 00:55:36

#2

GorillaTicTacs: Member; +231|6678|Kyiv, Ukraine

October Surprise time...

SURPRISE, its another war!

2008-10-27 02:01:08

#3

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6775

U shudn't b thar.

GTFO!

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2008-10-27 02:33:39

#4

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6457|what

Syria says that civilians were killed in the raid.

You can't put that down to whatever you want, but I don't think the US should be antagonizing the situation there after what has happened in Pakistan.

Your starting to make more enemies than just the terrorists.

2008-10-27 02:48:26

#5

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6716|'Murka

Not like Syria was ever our "friend" to begin with.

Syria will do less than they did when the Israelis flew over 2/3 of their country and bombed the shit out of their nuke facility. We went just over the border and took out facilities that were facilitating foreign fighters getting into Iraq to maim and kill Coalition forces and Iraqi civilians.

Don't really see the downside.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-10-27 03:16:52

#6

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,817|6411|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:
We went just over the border and took out facilities that were facilitating foreign fighters getting into Iraq to maim and kill Coalition forces and Iraqi civilians.

According to you, the US govt hasn't commented yet.

FEOS wrote:
Don't really see the downside.

Four dead children aren't a downside then? Blimey.

And I'm sure Syria has plenty of buildings, its not as if you've actually achieved anything apart from upping the ante and creating a new bunch of martyrs and relatives hell-bent on revenge, pity, as things were looking up.

'Its president, Bashar Assad, has pursued indirect peace talks with Israel, mediated by Turkey, and says he wants direct talks next year. Syria also has agreed to establish diplomatic ties with Lebanon, a country it used to dominate both politically and militarily, and has worked harder at stemming the flow of militants into Iraq.'

I guess it is the case the US wants 100 years of mayhem in the middle east, if this is how it rewards positive action and progress.

Fuck Israel

2008-10-27 03:46:37

#7

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6716|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
We went just over the border and took out facilities that were facilitating foreign fighters getting into Iraq to maim and kill Coalition forces and Iraqi civilians.
According to you, the US govt hasn't commented yet.

Just going off what the news said last night.

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Don't really see the downside.
Four dead children aren't a downside then? Blimey.

No reports on any collateral damage on the news last night. Of course any dead or injured non-combatants is horrible.

Dilbert_X wrote:
And I'm sure Syria has plenty of buildings, its not as if you've actually achieved anything apart from upping the ante and creating a new bunch of martyrs and relatives hell-bent on revenge, pity, as things were looking up.

'Its president, Bashar Assad, has pursued indirect peace talks with Israel, mediated by Turkey, and says he wants direct talks next year. Syria also has agreed to establish diplomatic ties with Lebanon, a country it used to dominate both politically and militarily, and has worked harder at stemming the flow of militants into Iraq.'

I guess it is the case the US wants 100 years of mayhem in the middle east, if this is how it rewards positive action and progress.

Not all of Syria's (or the US's) policy decisions in the ME are (or will be) hinged on this one incident. It won't prevent Asad from talking with Israel. It won't prevent Syria from establishing diplomatic ties with Lebanon (which it still dominates both politically and militarily, though not directly). And clearly they haven't done enough to stem the flow of militants into Iraq, or the action wouldn't have been needed.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-10-27 03:57:36

#8

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,817|6411|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:
No reports on any collateral damage on the news last night. Of course any dead or injured non-combatants is horrible.

It was in the article referenced in the OP, try to keep up, and as far as I am aware Syria and the US aren't at war so all the dead are likely to be non-combatants. Strange that didn't occur to our resident Geneva Convention expert.

FEOS wrote:
Not all of Syria's (or the US's) policy decisions in the ME are (or will be) hinged on this one incident. It won't prevent Asad from talking with Israel. It won't prevent Syria from establishing diplomatic ties with Lebanon (which it still dominates both politically and militarily, though not directly).

Uh huh and what would the US attitude have been if the Syrian govt had sent soldiers into the US and killed a bunch of civilians building a house?
All the US policy decisions in the ME have hinged on one incident, why shouldn't the Syrians do the same?

And clearly they haven't done enough to stem the flow of militants into Iraq, or the action wouldn't have been needed.

If thats true then thats something to be dealt with through diplomacy, not helicopter gunships.
And its not up to nations to prevent people travelling through them.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-10-27 04:23:07)

Fuck Israel

2008-10-27 04:47:27

#9

jsnipy: ...; +3,277|6827|...

brb ww3

2008-10-27 05:06:06

#10

Braddock: Agitator; +916|6595|Éire

Keep digging America.

2008-10-27 05:23:48

#11

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6457|what

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
No reports on any collateral damage on the news last night. Of course any dead or injured non-combatants is horrible.
It was in the article referenced in the OP, try to keep up, and as far as I am aware Syria and the US aren't at war so all the dead are likely to be non-combatants. Strange that didn't occur to our resident Geneva Convention expert.

It's like he only reads what he chooses to from whatever source.

There were no reports of "collateral damage", what do you think civilians are?

2008-10-27 05:31:07

#12

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6860

Another example of America overstepping boundaries. The funny thing is that Syria has little or no oil. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, now Syria. Where next? You crazy yanks. When will you learn some fucking manners. Karma will ultimately and hopefully bite you in the ass.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-27 05:34:16)

2008-10-27 05:32:48

#13

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6457|what

CameronPoe wrote:
Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, now Syria. Where next?

Russia and North Korea seem to be the favourites. But it's not a two horse race yet.

2008-10-27 05:36:43

#14

thraSK: Best ___ in Aus; +57|6287

I think they're being a bit syri(a)! about the whole thing xD

2008-10-27 05:37:25

#15

GorillaTicTacs: Member; +231|6678|Kyiv, Ukraine

TheAussieReaper wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
No reports on any collateral damage on the news last night. Of course any dead or injured non-combatants is horrible.
It was in the article referenced in the OP, try to keep up, and as far as I am aware Syria and the US aren't at war so all the dead are likely to be non-combatants. Strange that didn't occur to our resident Geneva Convention expert.
It's like he only reads what he chooses to from whatever source.

There were no reports of "collateral damage", what do you think civilians are?

If a blowjob is not "sexual relations", then by God civilian casualties are not "collateral damage".

Oh crap, Clinton didn't get away with it. But he was a godless liberal, so its ok.

2008-10-27 06:21:12

#16

rammunition: Fully Loaded; +143|6166

There will be those who defend this attack, firstly by saying there is no proof it was the USA, and then insisting that if it was, the USA had every justification it needed because we all know Syria, like other Middle Eastern countries, is populated solely by "terrorists".

I'd like to point out to those people that with the current definition of terrorism in the US government being so arbitrary, you yourself can NEVER be sure you will not be a target.

2008-10-27 06:30:50

#17

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6457|what

rammunition wrote:
There will be those who defend this attack, firstly by saying there is no proof it was the USA

You idiot, it's already been confirmed by the US that were responsible. LOL

2008-10-27 06:35:36

#18

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|7115|Nårvei

There goes the planet ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2008-10-27 07:25:55

#19

Pug: UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate; +652|6847|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:
Another example of America overstepping boundaries. The funny thing is that Syria has little or no oil. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, now Syria. Where next? You crazy yanks. When will you learn some fucking manners. Karma will ultimately and hopefully bite you in the ass.

"A U.S. military official in Washington said Sunday that special forces conducted a raid in Syria that targeted the network of al-Qaida-linked foreign fighters moving through Syria into Iraq."

If true...please explain your thoughts.

2008-10-27 07:32:58

#20

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6860

Pug wrote:
CameronPoe wrote:
Another example of America overstepping boundaries. The funny thing is that Syria has little or no oil. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, now Syria. Where next? You crazy yanks. When will you learn some fucking manners. Karma will ultimately and hopefully bite you in the ass.
"A U.S. military official in Washington said Sunday that special forces conducted a raid in Syria that targeted the network of al-Qaida-linked foreign fighters moving through Syria into Iraq."

If true...please explain your thoughts.

If true: mind the fucking Syrian border and respect the sovereignty of Syria. Perhaps consult Syria on the matter? Same goes for Pakistan.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-27 07:36:06)

2008-10-27 07:36:24

#21

Pug: UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate; +652|6847|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:
If true: mind the fucking Syrian border and respect the sovereignty of Syria. Perhaps consult Syria on the matter?

Oh come on - wasn't there enough announcements and warnings about funding and helping the Iraqi opposition already?

How very convenient to have a short memory.

2008-10-27 07:39:46

#22

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6860

Pug wrote:
CameronPoe wrote:
If true: mind the fucking Syrian border and respect the sovereignty of Syria. Perhaps consult Syria on the matter?
Oh come on - wasn't there enough announcements and warnings about funding and helping the Iraqi opposition already?

How very convenient to have a short memory.

You consult directly with the leadership of the other nation and warn them exactly what you intend to do and they either accede, help, or tell you to fuck off. Bottom line is that you have no right to impinge on that nations sovereignty, especially so without direct consultation. Perhaps SECURING THE BORDER might suffice? Did that ever cross their minds? It's a two way border you know... Sheesh is it really that difficult to respect international law? The US is like the impetuous school bully in the playground who's taller than all the rest of the kids.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-27 07:41:26)

2008-10-27 07:48:08

#23

Pug: UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate; +652|6847|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:
You consult directly with the leadership of the other nation and warn them exactly what you intend to do and they either accede, help, or tell you to fuck off. Bottom line is that you have no right to impinge on that nations sovereignty, especially so without direct consultation. Perhaps SECURING THE BORDER might suffice? Did that ever cross their minds? It's a two way border you know... Sheesh is it really that difficult to respect international law? The US is like the impetuous school bully in the playground who's taller than all the rest of the kids.

Like I guess it only happens if the US attacks over the border but it's okay if Syria does the same?

Respect goes both ways, does it not?

2008-10-27 07:59:04

#24

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6834|Global Command

CameronPoe wrote:
Pug wrote:
CameronPoe wrote:
If true: mind the fucking Syrian border and respect the sovereignty of Syria. Perhaps consult Syria on the matter?
Oh come on - wasn't there enough announcements and warnings about funding and helping the Iraqi opposition already?

How very convenient to have a short memory.
You consult directly with the leadership of the other nation and warn them exactly what you intend to do and they either accede, help, or tell you to fuck off. Bottom line is that you have no right to impinge on that nations sovereignty, especially so without direct consultation. Perhaps SECURING THE BORDER might suffice? Did that ever cross their minds? It's a two way border you know... Sheesh is it really that difficult to respect international law? The US is like the impetuous school bully in the playground who's taller than all the rest of the kids.

Rather smug of you to assume that our leadership did not consult directly with the leadership of the other nation before we attacked.

2008-10-27 08:01:32

#25

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6860

ATG wrote:
Rather smug of you to assume that our leadership did not consult directly with the leadership of the other nation before we attacked.

Well the Syrian government press releases seem to suggest they didn't.

"If [the US has] any proof of any insurgency, instead of applying the law of the jungle and penetrating, unprovoked, a sovereign country, they should come to the Syrians first and share this information," he [Syria's press attache in London, Jihad Makdissi] said.

BF2S Forums Syria

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

rammunition wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Pug wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Pug wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Pug wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

ATG wrote:

Board footer