PICK SYRIA'S D-DAY

[JudgeDredd]

Serious Doomsday? No, Syria's..

The "Pick Iraqs D-Day" went well. many anti-war users got to have their say. some were within a week from two months out, and 1 guy hit the exact day bombing began a whole month before formalized conflict.

Is prediction a form of violence? Of-course NOT!
Citizens need fore-warning, just as much as military planners need super-computers!

A much harder question is; "Will Syria be next?"

..Wade started an interesting topic in General based on this presumption, and the political rhetoric has already begun in earnest (ie. whilst US troops are battle-ready, and with re-inforcements still en-route!)

Ultimately; "When do you think conflict will begin?"

[bumcheekcity]

i dunno. i reckon it'll take longer this time. people are wising up to the arguments Bush puts in.

why cant we liberate a country with no oil?

[karasz]

i dont think we are actually going to attack syria... just through some sanctions on them and wait for the young king? i think to give in... just like in CUBA and IRAQ...

bombs drop september 2004... helps with the ya know prez election...

and brings up the anti-war movement the dems are going to need to have a chance at the white house

[RoboTripper]

I don't think we'll go to war with Syria, I agree with the above posters that we'll just screw them economically and diplomatically. Iraq had a lot of strikes against them, while Syria has been pretty quiet until just recently... and they are definitely not doing the North Korea complete defiance thing, most likely due to the fact that the U.S. is on their doorstep.

Also, why can't Syria possess WoMD?

[Ted-Easton]

I opened the Newspaper today, saw an article about the US and Syria, something about weapons of mass destruction, I threw the paper into the garbage in digust and didn't read a thing for the rest of the day.

[karasz]

At 4/14/03 03:21 PM, Crack_Smoker wrote: I don't think we'll go to war with Syria, I agree with the above posters that we'll just screw them economically and diplomatically.

sanctions dont work... look at CUBA and at IRAQ...

:Iraq had a lot of strikes against them, while Syria has been pretty quiet until just recently... and they are definitely not doing the North Korea complete defiance thing, most likely due to the fact that the U.S. is on their doorstep.

yeah but we will invade... north korea is a bigger threat but syria is in the mid-east... and bush wants that as his legacy...

Also, why can't Syria possess WoMD?

same reason iraq cant... cuz they may use them against US or give them to terrorists...

also after syria is lebanon... then jordan since it would surrounded by them...

[bumcheekcity]

At 4/14/03 03:22 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: I opened the Newspaper today, saw an article about the US and Syria, something about weapons of mass destruction, I threw the paper into the garbage in digust and didn't read a thing for the rest of the day.

they are feeding us quite a lot of drivel about the WMDs people have havent they? why couldnt we just have kept the invoices?

[Evanauto]

At 4/14/03 12:27 PM, Judge_DREDD wrote:

A much harder question is; "Will Syria be next?"

i sure hope not

[Ted-Easton]

As far as I'm concerned, the US can invade every country in the world, as long as the news isn't flooded with it.

[Shangui]

Attacking Syria would be a critical mistake, yet I feel Bush might go for it anyway, he seems to have a thing for middle east. I dont think Bush will have the time for another war in this mandate, if he is reelected, he might just do it and continue his rampage cutting all the way through his famous "axis of evil" thretening any country who might have some slight link with countries targeted by Bush's military campain. Syria may be spared, Bush might stop his rampage after making one realization : WAR AINT FREE. If I must give a date, if the attack does happen, I would say march 2005... a blind guess...

[NEMESiSZ]

Syria isn't stupid enough to stand up to the United States, unlike Iraq, they realize if they can't even defeat Israel with four allies, they don't stand a chance against the USA alone.

If I were President, I'd be putting pressure on Cuba, because they're the only enemy with the actual ability to threaten the US.

[Taxman2A]

At 4/14/03 03:22 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: I opened the Newspaper today, saw an article about the US and Syria, something about weapons of mass destruction, I threw the paper into the garbage in digust and didn't read a thing for the rest of the day.

lol... can't really blame you right there. I personally don't think there is any possibility of us going to war with Syria. The US right now is skating a thin line between "Worlds police force" and "World's imperialist military presense". If only for political reasons alone, we will not wage war with Syria.

[karasz]

At 4/14/03 09:44 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: If I were President, I'd be putting pressure on Cuba, because they're the only enemy with the actual ability to threaten the US.

yeah cuz all of those refugees barely making it on a raft to the US are the real problem...

How is going after Cubans going to make the US safer?

[TheEvilOne]

Obviously, our relationship with Syria is on the rocks at the moment, but I doubt it will come to war. I think we'll just put lots of diplomatic pressure on them. At this point in time, I think it's more important to deal with North Korea.

People say a lot of things about Bush, but I'm sure he knows when to quit. I doubt you will see bombs start falling on Syria with 2004 just around the corner. Besides, I think the economy will make a rebound between now and the election.

[bumcheekcity]

At 4/14/03 03:21 PM, Crack_Smoker wrote: Why can't Syria possess WoMD?

they cant possess them because they cant make them. the current laws say that you cant make them, but if you do have some you can keep them. this was made by the US and Russia when they had tens of thousands, so they could keep them and not let others have them.

[karasz]

At 4/15/03 08:48 AM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 4/14/03 03:21 PM, Crack_Smoker wrote: Why can't Syria possess WoMD?

they cant possess them because they cant make them. the current laws say that you cant make them, but if you do have some you can keep them. this was made by the US and Russia when they had tens of thousands, so they could keep them and not let others have them.

the more people with a bomb that cann destroy the world the harder it becomes to deter all of them... imagine if osama had a nuke, would he use it? probably, if i were him i definitely would use it...

russia and the USA, britian china and france all have them cuz they need to balance out each other... and we all know that the leaders of those nations wont use them... unless attacked first...

if nations with un-traditionalist foreign policies, and irrational leaders the world gets a lot scarier...

[JudgeDredd]

At 4/14/03 08:30 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: As far as I'm concerned, the US can invade every country in the world, as long as the news isn't flooded with it.

Ahh, a propagandous QUASI-DICTATORSHIP eh!

Even Nth Korea is now threatened with "inspections" .. WTF does that mean? (pre-pre'emptive-invasion-criteria)

[Nightshadeplus]

Bush will demand Syria to cooperate with the US in handing over Iraqi officials that are believed to be hiding in the country (Those believing this will only be the Bush administration). Bush will also suspect Syria of aiding Iraq and stockpiling WoMD for Saddam before the invasion of Iraq. Bush will demand Syria to disarm or face the consequences. Some protests from the country's leaders will be put on the news but will be reduced to the sound of a buzzing gnat in US news while emphasizing Bush's fight to secure liberty and freedom in the Middle East to protect the Iraqi people, coalition fighters, Israel and the people of the US. This will go on for about a few weeks as coalition forces are moved near Syria's borders to prepare an assualt. Bush will make one final demand for Syria to comply with the US then invade the country. Iraq will be left with a skeleton gov't while coalition fighters that are still in Iraq will concentrate on protecting oil-rich sites. All other areas in Iraq will be left to its own devices. Warlords, religious fanatics and remnants of Saddam's Baath party forces will have control of the outlying areas outside of US control. Those are my predictions.

[JMHX]

Syria...hmm...it's going to take a longer time than Iraq because of all the paperwork left over from our promise to install a government in Iraq. We can't run away from this like we did Afghanistan, or Bush is going to have serious problems come re-election time. I noticed George wasted no time, though, in pointing fingers and moving down his "Three nations in three years" Stalinesque plan.

It's all very unnerving.

[NEMESiSZ]

At 4/14/03 11:25 PM, karasz wrote: How is going after Cubans going to make the US safer?

In case you haven't noticed, Cuba is an enemy of the USA, and they are closer than any other rogue state.

Sorry if that doesn't agree with your anti-american propoganda, fool.

[Nightshadeplus]

At 4/15/03 05:57 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: In case you haven't noticed, Cuba is an enemy of the USA, and they are closer than any other rogue state.

Sorry if that doesn't agree with your anti-american propoganda, fool.

Sheesh! If Cuba is that bad, I wonder why the US decided to imprison terrorists at Guatanamo Bay in the first place.

[NEMESiSZ]

At 4/15/03 08:09 PM, Nightshadeplus wrote: Sheesh! If Cuba is that bad, I wonder why the US decided to imprison terrorists at Guatanamo Bay in the first place.

Wow, I don't know what part of your ignorance to shoot down first...

[FUNKbrs]

who cares who we kill, as long as theyre not us? I mean, how can we enjoy the spoils of war unless we kill a bunch of innocents? why do we pretend to be a moral country when we go against the laws of science, nature, and morality as much as we do? kill the towel head bastards, even when they wear baseball caps. THE WAR WILL NOT END UNTIL THE DOMINION RULES ALL!!!

[Nightshadeplus]

At 4/15/03 08:24 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Wow, I don't know what part of your ignorance to shoot down first...

Well...just aim and fire, my friend.

[TheShrike]

My god.... when will this warmongering end?

I give Syria 2 months, btw...

[JudgeDredd]

aye, it's a hard one to predict because it's predicated on so many other variables, but the portents are "favourable"..

Jack Straw: "We have no list of countries to invade, and Syria is not on that list"

Bush: "We are victorious! ..it's a new Era for the Middle East"

Powell: "We wish that whole region would be rid of WMD" (..not mentioning Israel of-course ;)

Bin-laden: "Look honey! We have new neighbours.."

Saddam: "Woah, Syria's almost as nice as home!"

WMD: "they'll never find us now! Mwhhahahaa!!!"
---------------------

..seriously, Syria's speech at the UN security council meeting just as the Iraq war started was the best overview of America's posturing, purpose, and over-reaction that i've heard since 9-11.

Follow that up with it's "defiant attitude" and the scorching words in a recent press conference where Syria's representative gave Israel a strong warning against "increasing tensions in the region" ..and well, if you wanted to bake another loaf of Khoubz Araby, then that's about all the ingredients you would need..

neighbours:
Turkey; Muslim Democracy
Israel; US-Democracy
Iraq; Quasi-US-Democarcy

Syria; Semi-Autocracy "..simply add heat - hey presto!" ..US-Democracy

when? i hope never! but realistically the US would do it just to piss-off the French - "following an international crisis" - 25 October 2003

[MadMax501]

We won't attack Syria, even Bush is smart enough to know that that would neither be a politically savvy move, nor a safe one for civilians in the U.S. and Israel. We must remember that we are not omnipotent, and that many things our country has done has come to haunt us.

[karasz]

At 4/15/03 05:57 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote:

At 4/14/03 11:25 PM, karasz wrote: How is going after Cubans going to make the US safer?

In case you haven't noticed, Cuba is an enemy of the USA, and they are closer than any other rogue state.

so is FUCKING AL-QAEDA but where is OSAMA??? OH thats right osama doesnt exist anymore, ONLY saddam exists, and since he isnt going to be found, GUESS what, it will be someone else...

Sorry if that doesn't agree with your anti-american propoganda, fool.

im not anti-american... just PRO-THINKING... and i know that Cuba is considered an 'enemy' but jesus fucking christ what for? cuz they are communists? `there are many other MORE dangerous countries to the US than fucking CUBA... like NORTH KOREA, which has not been talked bout by the BUSH administration since the Iraq thing came up... saudi arabia has more ANTI-AMERICANS than cuba does... yet we DO nothing to saudi arabia... but CUBA we have sanctions on... makes great fucking sense to me...

And another thing... what makes me anti-american?

[bumcheekcity]

At 4/15/03 09:41 AM, karasz wrote: the more people with a bomb that cann destroy the world the harder it becomes to deter all of them... imagine if osama had a nuke, would he use it? probably, if i were him i definitely would use it...

russia and the USA, britian china and france all have them cuz they need to balance out each other... and we all know that the leaders of those nations wont use them... unless attacked first...

if nations with un-traditionalist foreign policies, and irrational leaders the world gets a lot scarier...

russia, china, britain and the US dont need them if no-one else has them. its the fact that we have them and the utter hypocracy that makes other countries have them.

also, they try to nick ours.

[House-Of-Leaves]

At 4/15/03 08:24 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote:

At 4/15/03 08:09 PM, Nightshadeplus wrote: Sheesh! If Cuba is that bad, I wonder why the US decided to imprison terrorists at Guatanamo Bay in the first place.

Wow, I don't know what part of your ignorance to shoot down first...

NemesisZ, this is possibly the first time I've agreed with you (partially) about something in a LONG time.

So let me help with shooting down ignorance.

First...Nightshadeplus? Ignorance just means that you're uninformed.

Guantanamo Bay is actually not just a base, but a very strategic base. It doesn't mean we're on good terms with Cuba...with the fenceline being up, and armed guards staring at each other for most of the day? I'd say it's a pretty volatile place to be.

The fact is Cuba IS NOT a US-friendly place, and it IS closer than any other threat. The fact that we have a key base there helps us, but the fact is...just because we have a base there, doesn't mean we're friends with them.

Hell. I'd like to have the embargo lifted, so I could get some good freakin' cuban cigars! This american shit is TIRING!

(For those of you that are new and might be confused...yes. I'm a girl. I smoke cigars. Get over it.)