Iran’s Agony in Syria

[kingblaze84]

Wow interesting.....if Iran is this weak fighting Syrian rebels, many of whom are allies with ISIS, then I can see that Iran would struggle just as much against ISIS in Iraq. ISIS is only getting more power in Syria and Iraq and with more rebel groups allying themselves with them, it looks like Syria is better off getting more help from Russia

 

[kingblaze84]

=player_detailpage

ISIS parading tanks and SCUD missiles in the streets of Syria lol.....I wonder how much longer till Assad falls. Especially since America also wants Assad taken down (America allying with ISIS, funny stuff)

 

[zombie]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

 

[kingblaze84]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

 

[zombie]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

because if we don't there is going to be a larger war sooner or later if we don't do something in iraq we should at least do something in syria, so that we can contain isis someplace, either in iraq or syria. i keep trying to tell you their is no way around the coming fight it has to be done and we are the only people with the balls and power to do it.

 

[cainvelasquez]

Iran is zero threat to the west. I would rather support Assad than ISIS and islamists.

 

[kingblaze84]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

because if we don't there is going to be a larger war sooner or later if we don't do something in iraq we should at least do something in syria, so that we can contain isis someplace, either in iraq or syria. i keep trying to tell you their is no way around the coming fight it has to be done and we are the only people with the balls and power to do it.

If you're that afraid of Islamists, then you should be trying to protect Assad! He's the one fighting the Islamists, including ISIS. Why invade Syria when Assad still has most of the control there and he's pretty much on your side??

 

[zombie]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

because if we don't there is going to be a larger war sooner or later if we don't do something in iraq we should at least do something in syria, so that we can contain isis someplace, either in iraq or syria. i keep trying to tell you their is no way around the coming fight it has to be done and we are the only people with the balls and power to do it.

If you're that afraid of Islamists, then you should be trying to protect Assad! He's the one fighting the Islamists, including ISIS. Why invade Syria when Assad still has most of the control there and he's pretty much on your side??

making friends with these people is a mistake that must not be repeated both sides should be taken down and syria put under united states military governorship like japan was after ww2. if we allow one side to kill the other then invade so after we can rid ourselves of both sides before either solidifies their power.

 

[kingblaze84]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

because if we don't there is going to be a larger war sooner or later if we don't do something in iraq we should at least do something in syria, so that we can contain isis someplace, either in iraq or syria. i keep trying to tell you their is no way around the coming fight it has to be done and we are the only people with the balls and power to do it.

If you're that afraid of Islamists, then you should be trying to protect Assad! He's the one fighting the Islamists, including ISIS. Why invade Syria when Assad still has most of the control there and he's pretty much on your side??

making friends with these people is a mistake that must not be repeated both sides should be taken down and syria put under united states military governorship like japan was after ww2. if we allow one side to kill the other then invade so after we can rid ourselves of both sides before either solidifies their power.

It's not that simple though, your strategy is the same horrible mistake we made in Iraq. We got rid of an established govt in Saddam Hussein and tried to start from scratch, America isn't good at nation building lol, look at Afghanistan as another example.

Taking out ISIS AND ASSAD? You know how fucking hard that's gonna be? America knows damn well that ISIS is imbedded with the Syrian population at this point (many of them at least), we would be fighting 3 wars in your scenario, the people of Syria, ISIS and Assad not a good strategy at all. American cities are already doing budget cuts due to severe debt, and you want America to take on more of it?? We're better off working with Assad, at least he isn't a radical like ISIS. And if the people wana be ruled by ISIS, fine, but we can't fight 3 wars in Syria alone man it would be a disaster. We'd need to use nuclear weapons for your strategy.

 

[zombie]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

because if we don't there is going to be a larger war sooner or later if we don't do something in iraq we should at least do something in syria, so that we can contain isis someplace, either in iraq or syria. i keep trying to tell you their is no way around the coming fight it has to be done and we are the only people with the balls and power to do it.

If you're that afraid of Islamists, then you should be trying to protect Assad! He's the one fighting the Islamists, including ISIS. Why invade Syria when Assad still has most of the control there and he's pretty much on your side??

making friends with these people is a mistake that must not be repeated both sides should be taken down and syria put under united states military governorship like japan was after ww2. if we allow one side to kill the other then invade so after we can rid ourselves of both sides before either solidifies their power.

It's not that simple though, your strategy is the same horrible mistake we made in Iraq. We got rid of an established govt in Saddam Hussein and tried to start from scratch, America isn't good at nation building lol, look at Afghanistan as another example.

Taking out ISIS AND ASSAD? You know how fucking hard that's gonna be? America knows damn well that ISIS is imbedded with the Syrian population at this point (many of them at least), we would be fighting 3 wars in your scenario, the people of Syria, ISIS and Assad not a good strategy at all. American cities are already doing budget cuts due to severe debt, and you want America to take on more of it?? We're better off working with Assad, at least he isn't a radical like ISIS. And if the people wana be ruled by ISIS, fine, but we can't fight 3 wars in Syria alone man it would be a disaster. We'd need to use nuclear weapons for your strategy.

No it's not the same. what we did in iraq was try to teach them democracy i don't want to do that. i want to put them directly under our rulership. taking out either side will be easier once one side is all but gone after fighting years of a civil war.

what you described is exactly not want i want.

 

[janklow]

ISIS parading tanks and SCUD missiles in the streets of Syria lol...

eh, it's still a lot easier to parade shit around than it is to DO SOMETHING with it

 

[kingblaze84]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

because if we don't there is going to be a larger war sooner or later if we don't do something in iraq we should at least do something in syria, so that we can contain isis someplace, either in iraq or syria. i keep trying to tell you their is no way around the coming fight it has to be done and we are the only people with the balls and power to do it.

If you're that afraid of Islamists, then you should be trying to protect Assad! He's the one fighting the Islamists, including ISIS. Why invade Syria when Assad still has most of the control there and he's pretty much on your side??

making friends with these people is a mistake that must not be repeated both sides should be taken down and syria put under united states military governorship like japan was after ww2. if we allow one side to kill the other then invade so after we can rid ourselves of both sides before either solidifies their power.

It's not that simple though, your strategy is the same horrible mistake we made in Iraq. We got rid of an established govt in Saddam Hussein and tried to start from scratch, America isn't good at nation building lol, look at Afghanistan as another example.

Taking out ISIS AND ASSAD? You know how fucking hard that's gonna be? America knows damn well that ISIS is imbedded with the Syrian population at this point (many of them at least), we would be fighting 3 wars in your scenario, the people of Syria, ISIS and Assad not a good strategy at all. American cities are already doing budget cuts due to severe debt, and you want America to take on more of it?? We're better off working with Assad, at least he isn't a radical like ISIS. And if the people wana be ruled by ISIS, fine, but we can't fight 3 wars in Syria alone man it would be a disaster. We'd need to use nuclear weapons for your strategy.

No it's not the same. what we did in iraq was try to teach them democracy i don't want to do that. i want to put them directly under our rulership. taking out either side will be easier once one side is all but gone after fighting years of a civil war.

what you described is exactly not want i want.

Keeping Syria under a direct rulership requires a puppet because no Syrian would accept an American as the ruler there, and who would be the puppet? Even if one side takes out the other and America goes after the winner, it's still gonna be a difficult plan because America sucks at fighting guerilla warfare. America under your strategy also would have to occupy Syria for a long time because we all know America is considered the Great Satan in the Middle East (For good reason). People from all over the Muslim world would be thrilled to get the chance to kill and behead American soldiers first chance they get.

Your strategy would also make America hated even more in the Middle East and god help us if bombs kill the majority Sunni populations in Syria, hell would break lose because most of the Arab world is Sunni. America is better off working with Assad, I still don't know why Obama has so much beef with him.

 

[kingblaze84]

ISIS parading tanks and SCUD missiles in the streets of Syria lol...

eh, it's still a lot easier to parade shit around than it is to DO SOMETHING with it

ISIS is already using those tanks in Syria AND Iraq. They're occupying Syrian towns and Iraqi cities with those tanks. So yeah they already are doing something with it.

 

[zombie]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

because if we don't there is going to be a larger war sooner or later if we don't do something in iraq we should at least do something in syria, so that we can contain isis someplace, either in iraq or syria. i keep trying to tell you their is no way around the coming fight it has to be done and we are the only people with the balls and power to do it.

If you're that afraid of Islamists, then you should be trying to protect Assad! He's the one fighting the Islamists, including ISIS. Why invade Syria when Assad still has most of the control there and he's pretty much on your side??

making friends with these people is a mistake that must not be repeated both sides should be taken down and syria put under united states military governorship like japan was after ww2. if we allow one side to kill the other then invade so after we can rid ourselves of both sides before either solidifies their power.

It's not that simple though, your strategy is the same horrible mistake we made in Iraq. We got rid of an established govt in Saddam Hussein and tried to start from scratch, America isn't good at nation building lol, look at Afghanistan as another example.

Taking out ISIS AND ASSAD? You know how fucking hard that's gonna be? America knows damn well that ISIS is imbedded with the Syrian population at this point (many of them at least), we would be fighting 3 wars in your scenario, the people of Syria, ISIS and Assad not a good strategy at all. American cities are already doing budget cuts due to severe debt, and you want America to take on more of it?? We're better off working with Assad, at least he isn't a radical like ISIS. And if the people wana be ruled by ISIS, fine, but we can't fight 3 wars in Syria alone man it would be a disaster. We'd need to use nuclear weapons for your strategy.

No it's not the same. what we did in iraq was try to teach them democracy i don't want to do that. i want to put them directly under our rulership. taking out either side will be easier once one side is all but gone after fighting years of a civil war.

what you described is exactly not want i want.

Keeping Syria under a direct rulership requires a puppet because no Syrian would accept an American as the ruler there, and who would be the puppet? Even if one side takes out the other and America goes after the winner, it's still gonna be a difficult plan because America sucks at fighting guerilla warfare. America under your strategy also would have to occupy Syria for a long time because we all know America is considered the Great Satan in the Middle East (For good reason). People from all over the Muslim world would be thrilled to get the chance to kill and behead American soldiers first chance they get.

Your strategy would also make America hated even more in the Middle East and god help us if bombs kill the majority Sunni populations in Syria, hell would break lose because most of the Arab world is Sunni. America is better off working with Assad, I still don't know why Obama has so much beef with him.

I don't care how much they hate us after ww2 the germans hated us the Japanese hated us it made no difference to us then and things turned out for the best. I don't even believe that the average Syrian will hate us, people don't care about who rules them if that ruler can give them a better life especially after living through 2 years of bloody war.

You see isis is largely made up of people from outside Syria the average Syrians themselves want peace food and stability. with us there groups like isis would have to go back to suicide bombing and I am willing to live with that for as long as it takes to create a civilized society there.

once America made the foolish choice to get involved in Iraq we should never have left until it was running the way we wanted it too and even then we should never have fully left until much later, after we had made a cultural impact on the general beliefs of the population. America did not fully pull out of japan until 1972

You cannot work with assad he's too much of a blatant dictator no more compromising with these people,they need to be fought until they vanish, with isis you can go in and do what have to do under cover of fighting terrorism.

 

[kingblaze84]

as soon as assad is taken down we should invade syria.

LOL you can't be serious....why in the hell would that be a good idea

because if we don't there is going to be a larger war sooner or later if we don't do something in iraq we should at least do something in syria, so that we can contain isis someplace, either in iraq or syria. i keep trying to tell you their is no way around the coming fight it has to be done and we are the only people with the balls and power to do it.

If you're that afraid of Islamists, then you should be trying to protect Assad! He's the one fighting the Islamists, including ISIS. Why invade Syria when Assad still has most of the control there and he's pretty much on your side??

making friends with these people is a mistake that must not be repeated both sides should be taken down and syria put under united states military governorship like japan was after ww2. if we allow one side to kill the other then invade so after we can rid ourselves of both sides before either solidifies their power.

It's not that simple though, your strategy is the same horrible mistake we made in Iraq. We got rid of an established govt in Saddam Hussein and tried to start from scratch, America isn't good at nation building lol, look at Afghanistan as another example.

Taking out ISIS AND ASSAD? You know how fucking hard that's gonna be? America knows damn well that ISIS is imbedded with the Syrian population at this point (many of them at least), we would be fighting 3 wars in your scenario, the people of Syria, ISIS and Assad not a good strategy at all. American cities are already doing budget cuts due to severe debt, and you want America to take on more of it?? We're better off working with Assad, at least he isn't a radical like ISIS. And if the people wana be ruled by ISIS, fine, but we can't fight 3 wars in Syria alone man it would be a disaster. We'd need to use nuclear weapons for your strategy.

No it's not the same. what we did in iraq was try to teach them democracy i don't want to do that. i want to put them directly under our rulership. taking out either side will be easier once one side is all but gone after fighting years of a civil war.

what you described is exactly not want i want.

Keeping Syria under a direct rulership requires a puppet because no Syrian would accept an American as the ruler there, and who would be the puppet? Even if one side takes out the other and America goes after the winner, it's still gonna be a difficult plan because America sucks at fighting guerilla warfare. America under your strategy also would have to occupy Syria for a long time because we all know America is considered the Great Satan in the Middle East (For good reason). People from all over the Muslim world would be thrilled to get the chance to kill and behead American soldiers first chance they get.

Your strategy would also make America hated even more in the Middle East and god help us if bombs kill the majority Sunni populations in Syria, hell would break lose because most of the Arab world is Sunni. America is better off working with Assad, I still don't know why Obama has so much beef with him.

I don't care how much they hate us after ww2 the germans hated us the Japanese hated us it made no difference to us then and things turned out for the best. I don't even believe that the average Syrian will hate us, people don't care about who rules them if that ruler can give them a better life especially after living through 2 years of bloody war.

You see isis is largely made up of people from outside Syria the average Syrians themselves want peace food and stability. with us there groups like isis would have to go back to suicide bombing and I am willing to live with that for as long as it takes to create a civilized society there.

once America made the foolish choice to get involved in Iraq we should never have left until it was running the way we wanted it too and even then we should never have fully left until much later, after we had made a cultural impact on the general beliefs of the population. America did not fully pull out of japan until 1972

You cannot work with assad he's too much of a blatant dictator no more compromising with these people,they need to be fought until they vanish, with isis you can go in and do what have to do under cover of fighting terrorism.

It's a very naive belief for you to think a nation as hated as America in the Middle East can ever hope to bring stability to a nation like Syria. You do realize America has been hated in the Middle East since the 60s, if not before right? Each time America sacrifices money and blood to "better" the life of people in that region (aka steal and murder people in that region to steal their resources), things always take a turn for the worse. America can't make a cultural impact in the Middle East because it has zero moral authority there, a country nicknamed the Great Satan in the Middle East has ZERO chance of bringing stability to Syria.

And even if America did try to do your strategy, it would be extremely expensive. Assad has the backing of Russia and Iran, it's one reason why Assad is still mostly in charge in Syria. To take him out would leave a huge power vacuum and open the floodgates to a 2nd war with ISIS, and NOBODY in American govt, or very few, think taking on ISIS is a good idea. Taking on ISIS means fighting in Iraq again because ISIS remains very powerful in Iraq. They control millions of people in Syria and have control of borders in Jordan and some say recruits in Yemen. Your idea is basically WW3. No one in large numbers will ever support your strategy, it's too expensive, too ambitious and worse, will increase terrorism worldwide. You seem to keep forgetting America is 17 trillion in debt. You also forget America can't even take care of the sick and wounded troops who were fucked up by the Taliban and insurgents in Iraq. And you want to add to America's wounded and dead total?

 

[kingblaze84]

I say let Russia and Iran deal with the total mess in Syria, America has enough people around the world who want to blow us up. Blowing up Syrian civilians and creating even more popular support for ISIS is the LAST thing we need to do. There's a reason Obama is wise enough to leave ISIS alone for now, he knows taking them head on will be expensive and will create massive civilian casualties, something ISIS deep down wants because it will cause their recruitment and popularity to increase. You are underestimating how hated America is in the Middle East......we cannot get involved, unless they attack us directly of course.

 

[zombie]

@kingblaze84

In my opinion the united states is only hated by the religious extremist in those nation it is those people that are at the heart of the hate they flare up the young and undereducated. Syria is in a unique situation and I believe that we can sway the population to our side as this war becomes more intense and the suffering increases the average person will desire peace no matter who gives it. I don't want to take assad out I want the rebels to take him out then we come in and take out the rebels who base their rebellion on religious principles, work with those who don't and the other religious minorities, bringing peace. Also it is a lie that America has been stealing resources in the middle east, it's just another anti-American myth.

like I said in other threads the goal would be if we cannot totally destroy isis everywhere then we must contain isis in one nation until they can be destroyed. As for the debt fears America HAS THE MONEY WE basically can manipulate the world's money as we see fit. You always underestimate the real power America has. THE wounded and dead are collateral damage. I know how that sounds but it is the truth, if you think too much about the people who will die nothing would be done. You are too emotional about the issue of the number of dead.

ww3 is how we should have approced the problem of militant islam in the first place 9/11 was the perfect excuse to deal with this problem but we wasted that chance. Now we have to deal with it piece by piece which will be more expensive. and if we don't do something now 10-15 years from now things will only get worse reaching a point that we can no longer ignore it.

 

[zombie]

I say let Russia and Iran deal with the total mess in Syria, America has enough people around the world who want to blow us up. Blowing up Syrian civilians and creating even more popular support for ISIS is the LAST thing we need to do. There's a reason Obama is wise enough to leave ISIS alone for now, he knows taking them head on will be expensive and will create massive civilian casualties, something ISIS deep down wants because it will cause their recruitment and popularity to increase. You are underestimating how hated America is in the Middle East......we cannot get involved, unless they attack us directly of course.

Russia and iran won't really be dealing with shit, neither has to power needed to deal with this alone or combined Russia won't risk it's blood and iran is already losing in Syria. YOU STILL HAVE NOT come up with a full solution to this problem leaving it alone is not an answer waiting for someone else to fix a problem only you can fix is not answer.

 

[zombie]

@Kingblaze84 our way of dealing with threats is too hope and pray they don't attack. moral authority in war can kick rocks that philosophy is one I don't hold too, more wars have been won without it than with it.

 

[kingblaze84]

@kingblaze84

In my opinion the united states is only hated by the religious extremist in those nation it is those people that are at the heart of the hate they flare up the young and undereducated. Syria is in a unique situation and I believe that we can sway the population to our side as this war becomes more intense and the suffering increases the average person will desire peace no matter who gives it. I don't want to take assad out I want the rebels to take him out then we come in and take out the rebels who base their rebellion on religious principles, work with those who don't and the other religious minorities, bringing peace. Also it is a lie that America has been stealing resources in the middle east, it's just another anti-American myth.

like I said in other threads the goal would be if we cannot totally destroy isis everywhere then we must contain isis in one nation until they can be destroyed. As for the debt fears America HAS THE MONEY WE basically can manipulate the world's money as we see fit. You always underestimate the real power America has. THE wounded and dead are collateral damage. I know how that sounds but it is the truth, if you think too much about the people who will die nothing would be done. You are too emotional about the issue of the number of dead.

ww3 is how we should have approced the problem of militant islam in the first place 9/11 was the perfect excuse to deal with this problem but we wasted that chance. Now we have to deal with it piece by piece which will be more expensive. and if we don't do something now 10-15 years from now things will only get worse reaching a point that we can no longer ignore it.

America is not just hated by religious extremists, it's a widespread hatred all over the region. Some nations there hate us less then others, but the hatred is beyond religious extremists, opinion polls from Americans, Europeans, and Arabs have proven that. I can show up many links to that but you're not a fan of polls because they tend to disagree with your unpopular worldviews.

As far as containing ISIS in one nation, I"ve already explained that ISIS controls many parts of Syria AND Iraq AND its borders LOL containing ISIS to one spot will be impossible. It's like containing racists to one nation, ISIS has an ideology that is widespread, hence its popular support in many parts of Syria and Iraq.

You are completely right in that I don't have faith in America's military power, America's military has failed over and over again in its goals for the Middle East. The war on terror continues after 12 years HAHAHAHAHA, so umm yeah I have ZERO faith in American military power doing shit in the Middle East. A military can't do shit if it doesn't have the moral authority needed to have the respect of a population, and the population of the Middle East for the most part has zero respect for American military. Once we left Iraq, it became a disaster. Once we leave Afghanistan, it WILL become a disaster.

You admit you want World War 3 against the Islamists in the Middle East, I appreciate your honesty. It's something I support other nations doing if they want to do it. America has bled itself dry morally and financially doing constant bombings of Middle Eastern civilians all over the region, and ISIS is one of the results of that. What's the big deal about letting Russia and Iran handle it? Even the VP of Iraq said America shouldn't get involved against ISIS, he said himself "America getting involved will only build popular support for ISIS", I'll bring up a link soon