The Syria Thread: Everything you wanted to know or say about it
- Thread starter Tecumsehsbones
- Start date
Re: Russia warns of nuclear disaster if Syria is hit
It's also good for the economy, marvellous for national unity, ensures full employment, and provides healthful and invigourating exercise.
Why, to restore the purity of our manly essences, of course!
It's also good for the economy, marvellous for national unity, ensures full employment, and provides healthful and invigourating exercise.
As he wants most to. He knows opposition to military action in Massachusetts is strong... and he doesn't want Obama upset at him. We know him here in Massachusetts.
Take him off the committee. His first major vote as a senator and he votes Present.
The whole Syria situation "sucks" big time.
Obama now says that he wasn't responsible for the "red line" comment; that everyone else was (the world, congress, the US) .... Nothing is ever his fault!! Must be nice to be perfect!
Ah well, at least he's keeping one aspect of his reputation in tact - not taking responsibility for anything and, apparently, he's quite stubborn (which would go along with why he doesn't take responsibility, I guess).
JMHO
JMHO
Obama now says that he wasn't responsible for the "red line" comment; that everyone else was (the world, congress, the US) .... Nothing is ever his fault!! Must be nice to be perfect!
Ah well, at least he's keeping one aspect of his reputation in tact - not taking responsibility for anything and, apparently, he's quite stubborn (which would go along with why he doesn't take responsibility, I guess).
JMHO
JMHO
Aren't you in a nat gas rich state voting to decide whether to blow Gazprom to bits? Don't bomb PetrosCanada assets.
You'd know better than I on that. Are you saying we actually have nat gas resources here? In Massachusetts we are so anti-fossil fuel.
We like wind power... except when it obstructs the view of the beautiful people.
My goodness that's right that only makes you 100% dependant and obviously a high dollar buyer from the surrounding red states that do have NG. The threat of cheaper higher electricity and heating is vote for the attack not wasted. Mobil and Chevron wish to do what Gazprom can do a no vote would hold them back from more money from Saudis to fight Iran in developing Lebanon's gas.
We could be sitting on the the biggest oil reserve and you'd never get a drill near it.
We are the ones who hug the base of trees and cry and beg them for forgiveness.
Then drive home to our cozy warm houses and chastise the maids for not picking up our kids socks.
We are the ones who hug the base of trees and cry and beg them for forgiveness.
Then drive home to our cozy warm houses and chastise the maids for not picking up our kids socks.
HE DIDN'T SAY 'STOP SIGN RED'hE CALLED FOR A 'STRWBERRY RED LINE'.
ITS SORTA LIKE Slick Willie Clinton on sex...
75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
The potential of strategic US strikes in Syria has sparked fears Damascus’ chemical weapons could fall into the wrong hands if the government is toppled. A recent congressional report says 75,000 troops would be needed to safeguard the WMD caches.
The Congressional Research Center (CRS) report, issued just one day before the alleged August 21 chemical weapons attack in a Damascus suburb, was compiled with the aim of “responding to possible scenarios involving the use, change of hands, or loss of control of Syrian chemical weapons.”
It states that Syria’s chemical weapon stockpiles, which a French intelligence report recently estimated at over 1,000 tons, have been secured by Syrian special forces.
“Due to the urgency of preventing access to these weapons by unauthorized groups, including terrorists, the United States government has been preparing for scenarios to secure the weapons in the event of the Assad regime’s loss of control,” the document reads
Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 7, 2012, then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta warned the ouster of Assad would present a scenario “100 times worse than what we dealt with in Libya.”
In order to secure the 50 chemical weapon and production sites spread across Syria, in addition to storage and research facilities, “The Pentagon has estimated that it would take over 75,000 troops to neutralize the chemical weapons,” the document continues, citing a February 2012 CNN report.
Meanwhile, a resolution backing the use of force against President Bashar Assad's government cleared the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on a 10-7 vote on Wednesday, although section 3 of the draft ostensibly ruled out US combat operations on the ground.
The wording of the text, however, could potentially allow for troops on the ground for the sake of non-offensive operations, including securing chemical weapons stockpiles and production facilities.
While the Senate committee initially opted to limit US military involvement in the country to 90 days with no potential of ground operations, Republican Senator John McCain joined forces with Democratic Senator Chris Coons to add a provision calling for "decisive changes to the present military balance of power on the ground in Syria."
The Obama administration’s vacillations on Syria were perhaps best exemplified by Secretary of State John Kerry. Speaking before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday, Kerry suggested it would be preferable to give the White House the power to send in ground forces in the event that Syria “imploded” or if chemical weapons were at risk of being obtained by extremists.
"I don't want to take off the table an option that might or might not be available to a president of the United States to secure our country," he told the committee in the run up to the vote.
After being told by Senator Bob Corker – the top Republican on the committee – his sentiments regarding boots on the ground were not “a very appropriate response,” Kerry quickly backtracked.
"Let's shut the door now," Kerry said. "The answer is, whatever prohibition clarifies it to Congress or the American people, there will not be American boots on the ground with respect to the civil war."
Having cleared committee, the measure authorizing force in Syria is expected to reach the Senate floor next week. Senator Rand Paul, a republican with strong ties to the Tea Party movement, has threatened a filibuster.
source: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls ? RT News
////////////////////////////////////////
Remember, Obama said no boots on the ground and these strikes have everything to do with the use of Chemical weapons.. so what happens when regime change has taken hold and Al Qaeda has access to those chemical weapons... then what, the USA will have to move into Syria and fight off the rebels?
75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
The potential of strategic US strikes in Syria has sparked fears Damascus’ chemical weapons could fall into the wrong hands if the government is toppled. A recent congressional report says 75,000 troops would be needed to safeguard the WMD caches.
The Congressional Research Center (CRS) report, issued just one day before the alleged August 21 chemical weapons attack in a Damascus suburb, was compiled with the aim of “responding to possible scenarios involving the use, change of hands, or loss of control of Syrian chemical weapons.”
It states that Syria’s chemical weapon stockpiles, which a French intelligence report recently estimated at over 1,000 tons, have been secured by Syrian special forces.
“Due to the urgency of preventing access to these weapons by unauthorized groups, including terrorists, the United States government has been preparing for scenarios to secure the weapons in the event of the Assad regime’s loss of control,” the document reads
Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 7, 2012, then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta warned the ouster of Assad would present a scenario “100 times worse than what we dealt with in Libya.”
In order to secure the 50 chemical weapon and production sites spread across Syria, in addition to storage and research facilities, “The Pentagon has estimated that it would take over 75,000 troops to neutralize the chemical weapons,” the document continues, citing a February 2012 CNN report.
Meanwhile, a resolution backing the use of force against President Bashar Assad's government cleared the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on a 10-7 vote on Wednesday, although section 3 of the draft ostensibly ruled out US combat operations on the ground.
The wording of the text, however, could potentially allow for troops on the ground for the sake of non-offensive operations, including securing chemical weapons stockpiles and production facilities.
While the Senate committee initially opted to limit US military involvement in the country to 90 days with no potential of ground operations, Republican Senator John McCain joined forces with Democratic Senator Chris Coons to add a provision calling for "decisive changes to the present military balance of power on the ground in Syria."
The Obama administration’s vacillations on Syria were perhaps best exemplified by Secretary of State John Kerry. Speaking before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday, Kerry suggested it would be preferable to give the White House the power to send in ground forces in the event that Syria “imploded” or if chemical weapons were at risk of being obtained by extremists.
"I don't want to take off the table an option that might or might not be available to a president of the United States to secure our country," he told the committee in the run up to the vote.
After being told by Senator Bob Corker – the top Republican on the committee – his sentiments regarding boots on the ground were not “a very appropriate response,” Kerry quickly backtracked.
"Let's shut the door now," Kerry said. "The answer is, whatever prohibition clarifies it to Congress or the American people, there will not be American boots on the ground with respect to the civil war."
Having cleared committee, the measure authorizing force in Syria is expected to reach the Senate floor next week. Senator Rand Paul, a republican with strong ties to the Tea Party movement, has threatened a filibuster.
source: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls ? RT News
////////////////////////////////////////
Remember, Obama said no boots on the ground and these strikes have everything to do with the use of Chemical weapons.. so what happens when regime change has taken hold and Al Qaeda has access to those chemical weapons... then what, the USA will have to move into Syria and fight off the rebels?
Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
If the Army starts issuing flip-flops, that's a bad sign. . .
If the Army starts issuing flip-flops, that's a bad sign. . .