Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
Flip-flops are called thongs in Canada. An army in thongs.
Flip-flops are called thongs in Canada. An army in thongs.
The Syria Thread: Everything you wanted to know or say about it
- Thread starter Tecumsehsbones
- Start date
Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
You didn't get "Shower Shoes" in the Army? The Army must have had a contract with Tenactin.
You didn't get "Shower Shoes" in the Army? The Army must have had a contract with Tenactin.
Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
Securing chemcial weapons is something the Russians should be doing.
Securing chemcial weapons is something the Russians should be doing.
Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
Why's that?? Russia is not pushing for regime change and sending in cruise missiles to destroy the current Government.
Why's that?? Russia is not pushing for regime change and sending in cruise missiles to destroy the current Government.
Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
And as I'm sure you're aware, the Air Force doesn't issue flip-flops. They issue bunny slippers.
A "thong" in America is butt-floss knickers.
Army? Please. I don't enjoy the company of rude people. USAF, thank you.
And as I'm sure you're aware, the Air Force doesn't issue flip-flops. They issue bunny slippers.
Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
Ahhh... my mistake.
USAF...That explains not having a need for shower shoes... private showers cleaned daily by the maids.
Ahhh... my mistake.
USAF...That explains not having a need for shower shoes... private showers cleaned daily by the maids.
Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
And the maids are quite well-paid, thank you.
FUZZY bunny slippers, I'll have you know.Ahhh... my mistake.
USAF...That explains not having a need for shower shoes... private showers cleaned daily by the maids.
And the maids are quite well-paid, thank you.
Re: Kerry Says Chemical Arms Attack in Syria Is ‘Undeniable’
I came across this from a few days ago re the debate of the U.S. defeat in the War of 1812. It fits the general pattern of American Wars of Imperial expansion.. 1812, Intervention in the Mexican Revolution, Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan.. i'm sure i've left some out.. of Declaring Victory.. and getting out when the conflict became long, bloody and indecisive.. having achieved NONE of their original objectives.. and usually leaving a shambles in the aftermath.
As regards Viet Nam.. in the Legislative and Executive policy reviews following the ingnominius 'Paris Accords' in 1973.. that led directly to the collapse of South Viet Nam 2 years later.. some general guidelines were produced to avoid in future the debacle that War became.
Paraphrased.. The US. was NOT to enter militarily a conflict WHERE
1. There was no clear, quick and achievable objective.
2. There was no domestic and international consensus for intervention.
3. Limited strikes would place a dynamic of gradually escalating entanglement to decide the final outcome.
4. The conflict was a Civil War... where complex historical, cultural and religious issues cannot be simplified to some simple global moral jugdement of good versus evil... or political ideologies.
As far as I can see, attacking Syria would break ALL of these caveats.
I came across this from a few days ago re the debate of the U.S. defeat in the War of 1812. It fits the general pattern of American Wars of Imperial expansion.. 1812, Intervention in the Mexican Revolution, Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan.. i'm sure i've left some out.. of Declaring Victory.. and getting out when the conflict became long, bloody and indecisive.. having achieved NONE of their original objectives.. and usually leaving a shambles in the aftermath.
As regards Viet Nam.. in the Legislative and Executive policy reviews following the ingnominius 'Paris Accords' in 1973.. that led directly to the collapse of South Viet Nam 2 years later.. some general guidelines were produced to avoid in future the debacle that War became.
Paraphrased.. The US. was NOT to enter militarily a conflict WHERE
1. There was no clear, quick and achievable objective.
2. There was no domestic and international consensus for intervention.
3. Limited strikes would place a dynamic of gradually escalating entanglement to decide the final outcome.
4. The conflict was a Civil War... where complex historical, cultural and religious issues cannot be simplified to some simple global moral jugdement of good versus evil... or political ideologies.
As far as I can see, attacking Syria would break ALL of these caveats.
Last edited:
Re: 75,000 troops needed to secure chemical weapons if Damascus falls
Assuming there are any chemical weapons in their hands, we can bomb them too.
Re: Kerry Says Chemical Arms Attack in Syria Is ‘Undeniable’
Wow... how long ago was that debate? You've been smarting over that beating you took in that debate for this long!!! Daaaaamn.
As to the rest of your post... blah blah blah. You're obviously still upset.
Wow... how long ago was that debate? You've been smarting over that beating you took in that debate for this long!!! Daaaaamn.
As to the rest of your post... blah blah blah. You're obviously still upset.
It's all in the details. Tamar partners, Gazprom agree to join forces to export liquefied gas - Business Israel News Broadcast | Haaretz
It's all about gas attacks. Big assed gas attacks. Libyans, Egyptians, Israelis, Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, Cyrpsuwhatchamacallits all want to live like we do and want Socialist benefits from their resources like we get.
Who is holding them back from that? Solve that problem. It's not the boogieman is it?
It's all about gas attacks. Big assed gas attacks. Libyans, Egyptians, Israelis, Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, Cyrpsuwhatchamacallits all want to live like we do and want Socialist benefits from their resources like we get.
Who is holding them back from that? Solve that problem. It's not the boogieman is it?