If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   NYT finally states the obvious: There is no secular "rebel" fighting force in Syria. It's all either Islamist groups, or Al Qaeda, so why are we sending Al Qaeda aid? Is Assad worse than Al Qaeda?   (nytimes.com) divider line 94
    More: Obvious, Islamists, NYT, al-Qaeda, Assad, fighting force, guerrilla war, provincial capital, Sunni Muslims  
•       •       •

4392 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Apr 2013 at 8:08 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



94 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-30 08:10:11 AM
Can't they both be equally bad?
 
2013-04-30 08:10:15 AM
Glass parking lot etc. and such.
 
2013-04-30 08:10:26 AM
One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.
 
2013-04-30 08:12:55 AM

GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.


I disagree.  Syrians deciding to have a civil war is CLEARLY Obama's fault.
 
2013-04-30 08:12:59 AM
Great, so that means we just stay the f*ck out of it then?
 
2013-04-30 08:13:08 AM
Because propping up power-mad dictators has worked out so well for the US in the past....
 
2013-04-30 08:13:13 AM

GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.


Well, the "red line" crap IS his fault, no doubt about it.

Of course, the neocons have been awfully quiet lately...why, just last year, with Libya and Egypt, they were bragging about how their invasion of Iraq was finally spreading peace, love, and democracy across the Middle East...
 
2013-04-30 08:14:32 AM
I thought Al Queda were the bad guys..or is that next week?

didn't we hang Saddam for helping them, or something?
 
2013-04-30 08:14:37 AM

GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.


So explain to us then how this is Obama's fault then.
 
2013-04-30 08:19:12 AM
Based on our Egypt, Lybia, and Iran strategy, we just have to be sure that whomever hates Israel the most gets to stay in power.
 
2013-04-30 08:19:41 AM
The enemy of my enemy is a useful tool.
 
2013-04-30 08:21:23 AM
There are so many really great reasons for Americans to mind our own business and stay the hell out of the Middles East that a single thread doesn't have space to list them all.
But the dilemma of having to choose to side with either genocidal tyrants or homicidal maniacs is another good one.
 
2013-04-30 08:25:06 AM
Then it seems pretty clear that we should stay the hell out of the fight then huh?
 
2013-04-30 08:25:50 AM

randomjsa: Based on our Egypt, Lybia, and Iran strategy, we just have to be sure that whomever hates Israel the most gets to stay in power.


Bibi needs a reminder who keeps him fed now and then.
 
2013-04-30 08:26:05 AM
How about we stay the fark out of it?
 
2013-04-30 08:26:08 AM

THX 1138: GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.

I disagree.  Syrians deciding to have a civil war is CLEARLY Obama's fault.


Well duh, the most famous muslim in the world is President of the US.  If he would have stayed in Africa/Middle East, there would be global peace.  It all makes perfect sense really.
 
2013-04-30 08:27:12 AM
Doing the thing over and over again, hoping for a different ending? That's the definition of insanity.

How's this for *OBVIOUS*? We should just get the hell out of that entire region. Check back when the dust settles.
 
2013-04-30 08:27:44 AM

Hobodeluxe: GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.

So explain to us then how this is Obama's fault then.


Because he had the audacity to be black, intelligent and the President all at the same time.
 
2013-04-30 08:28:13 AM
"In France, people don't like face veils so they passed laws against them," he said. "It's the same thing here. It's our right to push for the laws we want."

Guy does have a point... it's their country, let them fight over it.
We just need to stay out of it given our recent  and ongoing history of wars in the middle east.

Although by this point, if we don't get involved and the rebels win, the hard-liner Al Qaeda based groups will just use that to push their anti-western theme even further, and If Assad wins it'll be business as usual except for the fact that after Syria wouldn't even put up the false facade of 'cooperation' with the United States or the West, for the simple fact that we got involved in the first place.

Either way we're screwed, both sides suck... so we should just let them duke it out and cut our losses, just sucks for the civilians caught in the middle.
 
2013-04-30 08:28:17 AM
There is no Al-Qaeda only Zuul.
 
Esn
2013-04-30 08:34:00 AM

micuu: Because propping up power-mad dictators has worked out so well for the US in the past....


Well, Assad did actually agree to have democratic elections in the new constitution that he signed last year. His only catch was that he would also be a candidate. This was unacceptable to the rebels and to their sponsors (such as the definitely-not-democratic royals and princes of Saudi Arabia, who are supported by the US by the way), so the civil war drags on.

I don't know, seems to me like the obvious solution would be for the international community to send in observers to ensure that the free and fair elections that Assad already promised are actually free and fair. If the people decide to vote for Assad, so be it.

I don't understand why the West is sabotaging Syrians' democratic rights by insisting that only the rebels can be candidates in any election, and actively preventing a peace process.
 
2013-04-30 08:35:37 AM

GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.


If ony McCain had won the election we would have invaded Syria and installed a secular democratic government there by now

amidoinitrite?
 
2013-04-30 08:36:24 AM
Can't we just agree that all Muslims are bad and move on?
 
2013-04-30 08:37:16 AM
If Al Qaeda is too busy fighting a Russian puppet state, that's good news for us.
 
2013-04-30 08:37:34 AM

neversubmit: The enemy of my enemy is a useful tool.


Which ones are the useful too here then?
 
2013-04-30 08:37:38 AM
both sides are barbarous 3rd century fundies. Let them kill the shiat out of each other, and stop giving them our cash.
 
2013-04-30 08:38:49 AM

YixilTesiphon: Al Qaeda


Whoever it is that's using that name now, isn't the same people as before. Al Qaeda has basically become a franchise, minus the usual fees and agreements and common purpose.
 
2013-04-30 08:39:35 AM

Bit'O'Gristle: both sides are barbarous 3rd century fundies


Actually Assad isn't a fundy at all. Hell he's not even a Muslim.
 
2013-04-30 08:47:53 AM
Assad? Al-Qaeda? Shiat, kill 'em both and let Allah sort 'em out.

/maybe if we'd gotten involved in this sooner, Al-Qaeda wouldn't be running the show in the opposition
 
2013-04-30 08:48:00 AM
media.washingtonpost.com

"What has happened here is the president drew red lines about chemical weapons, thereby giving a green light to Bashar Assad to do anything short of that."

So what is the limit of what the United States, in your judgment, should do to put a limit on Assad?

"Well, as I said, a safe zone of arming the rebels, making sure that we help with the refugees. And be prepared with an international force to go in and secure these stocks of chemical and perhaps biological weapons."
 
2013-04-30 08:51:04 AM

The Muthaship: neversubmit: The enemy of my enemy is a useful tool.

Which ones are the useful too here then?


All, sell to all sides.
 
2013-04-30 08:51:23 AM

Hobodeluxe: GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.

So explain to us then how this is Obama's fault then.


Because this has dragged on for more than 2 years (as per article). If Obama had done something in the beginning the formerly secular opposition could have formed a government instead of being radicalized. That was the point of the article, what was secular is now radical. Perfect example of what doing nothing results in.
 
2013-04-30 08:55:21 AM

You Are All Sheep: I thought Al Queda were the bad guys..or is that next week?

didn't we hang Saddam for helping them, or something?


We didn't hang Saddam. The Iraqis did.

/CSB: I attended a day of his trial.
 
2013-04-30 08:55:32 AM
Dear rebels/Assad:

Congratulations on your victory, and the unification/secession of your nation. If you plan on living to see tomorrow or beyond, I better not hear a farking PEEP come out of that shiathole you call a country.

Signed, Uncle "happytouch" Sam
 
2013-04-30 09:00:02 AM
♪ Send in the clowns ♫...
 
2013-04-30 09:02:45 AM

PunGent: GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.

Well, the "red line" crap IS his fault, no doubt about it.

Of course, the neocons have been awfully quiet lately...why, just last year, with Libya and Egypt, they were bragging about how their invasion of Iraq was finally spreading peace, love, and democracy across the Middle East...


So you are choosing to cometely ignore the administration's marketing of the arab spring and go with blaming the gop. Kudos.
 
2013-04-30 09:05:20 AM

MyRandomName: PunGent: GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.

Well, the "red line" crap IS his fault, no doubt about it.

Of course, the neocons have been awfully quiet lately...why, just last year, with Libya and Egypt, they were bragging about how their invasion of Iraq was finally spreading peace, love, and democracy across the Middle East...

So you are choosing to cometely ignore the administration's marketing of the arab spring and go with blaming the gop. Kudos.


RA RA MY TEAM! YOUR TEAM SUCKS!
 
2013-04-30 09:07:11 AM
And people wonder why we don't want to get involved.
 
2013-04-30 09:07:21 AM
ZogDog:

Either way we're screwed, both sides suck... so we should just let them duke it out and cut our losses, just sucks for the civilians caught in the middle.

Yes Mr. Romero, that's ALWAYS the problem.  See Africa for classical case studies.
 
2013-04-30 09:09:03 AM
Syria has oil???  Then weaken the govt cheaply with free soldiers and then come in for the kill.
 
2013-04-30 09:11:26 AM
They're just fighting for their freedom... to enslave us all in a global Islamic theocracy.
 
hej
2013-04-30 09:15:31 AM

Tyrone Slothrop: Can't they both be equally bad?


So vote Taliban?
 
2013-04-30 09:20:24 AM
Use thermite to destroy the chemical stockpiles. Don't get involved more than that. Let this be Iran's Vietnam.
 
2013-04-30 09:23:19 AM

PunGent: Of course, the neocons have been awfully quiet lately...why, just last year, with Libya and Egypt, they were bragging about how their invasion of Iraq was finally spreading peace, love, and democracy across the Middle East...


No, at least not anyone with sense.  Go back and check the threads.  In Egypt, Libs were giddy about the people revolting against tyranny.  Conservatives that understand how the world really works were telling them the devil they don't know will be worse than the devil they have now.

In Libya the only real hope was that they all kill each other, but again the left was fully behind the 'freedom fighters'.  We even conducted combat operations on their behalf - and got thanked by having our ambassador murdered.

The Arab spring worked out pretty much exactly how conservatives thought it would.
 
2013-04-30 09:23:24 AM

PunGent: GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.

Well, the "red line" crap IS his fault, no doubt about it.


If it had kept Assad from using chemical weapons it would have been a good bluff. The problem with bluffing is that it makes you look like a chump if you get called on it and don't follow up.
 
2013-04-30 09:29:34 AM
Of course, America has compounded this concern by refusing to properly aid secular opposition forces, i.e. the initial dissidents composed primarily of army defectors. Left with no alternative of outside support beyond the Gulf States, we're now ... shocked ... that the leading members of the anti-Assad forces are Islamist? It's almost as if people would choose not being massacred by Assad's paramilitary thugs or blown apart by ballistic missiles over our timid "non-lethal" aid.
 
2013-04-30 09:38:35 AM

Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor: secular opposition forces


That would have lost any election to the extremists.
 
2013-04-30 09:41:39 AM

Ted Kennedy's Brain Tumor: Of course, America has compounded this concern by refusing to properly aid secular opposition forces, i.e. the initial dissidents composed primarily of army defectors. Left with no alternative of outside support beyond the Gulf States, we're now ... shocked ... that the leading members of the anti-Assad forces are Islamist? It's almost as if people would choose not being massacred by Assad's paramilitary thugs or blown apart by ballistic missiles over our timid "non-lethal" aid.


onyxruby: Hobodeluxe: GORDON: One thing for sure, it isn't Obama's fault, because nothing is ever his fault.  He's only the President.

So explain to us then how this is Obama's fault then.

Because this has dragged on for more than 2 years (as per article). If Obama had done something in the beginning the formerly secular opposition could have formed a government instead of being radicalized. That was the point of the article, what was secular is now radical. Perfect example of what doing nothing results in.


We have been supporting them. But you must realize that we also have to make sure the stuff gets to the right people. If we sent in arms in the beginning and they turned out to be AQ then you'd be screaming about us arming AQ. Do you think we should have put our own boots on the ground there at the beginning? Should we have taken on the Syrian Army for the rebels? Were you wiling to support that level of intervention with your tax dollars and the blood of your fellow citizens?
 
2013-04-30 09:47:00 AM

JustGetItRight: In Egypt, Libs were giddy about the people revolting against tyranny. Conservatives that understand how the world really works were telling them the devil they don't know will be worse than the devil they have now.


Both were absurdly oversimplified responses.
 
2013-04-30 09:47:09 AM

onyxruby: Because this has dragged on for more than 2 years (as per article). If Obama had done something in the beginning the formerly secular opposition could have formed a government instead of being radicalized. That was the point of the article, what was secular is now radical. Perfect example of what doing nothing results in.


Fark it. Doing nothing gets us this and it gets us Darfur and Rwanda. Doing something with our military gets Iraq and Afghanistan. Doing something without the military gets us Zimbabwe. And once in a while things go fairly well, but only AFTER we fark up (Balkans, maybe Iraq).
 
Displayed 50 of 94 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report