US invades Syria - briefly. Was it legal?

[TCO]

That country is pretty far west of the Pecos. We would be more careful near NK. Agreed. fine.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Andrew1999


Yeah, I know. I just figured whoever was coordinating the attack would be keeping an eye on it. I doubt we'd be so cavalier about border incursions if we were chasing people near North Korea.

When the question is "Have we invaded another country?", I don't think "Hell if I know" is an acceptable response.

If they don't bother to mark their border, then they can't be too worried about it. The Saudis and Yemenis don't even define most of their border, out around Al Otofsand. The NK border is a bit harder to miss.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by PLATO1003
Dad was over there on a business trip in early 1970's. Said Beirut was the most western city in ME. Sad what happened there. Even though Mtg says that the problem started before Syria got involved, somehow I believe that they had a lot to do with the discontent among the growing Muslim population. I believe that they were trying to create a situation where another front opened in their war with Israel. It seems that they were successful at the expense of a decent country.

Not much of a front, particularly when the Syrian sponsored militia (primarily Amal) was also fighting Hesbollah and PLO backed elements.

Why would a growing Moslem population in an ostensibly democratic country need outside influence to be discontent, when the supposedly democratic rulers played games with representation that would embarass the Jim Crow south? And used that corrupted representation system to preserve economic and political advantage in favor of the conservative Christians? The French didn't encourage us to rebel against England, we figured it out on our own. If anything, there would be more influence from Nasser and his brand of socialist Arab nationalism.

Any time you have political and economic power split along ethnic or religious lines, you've got a powder keg waiting to go off. The Syrians couldn't create that condition out of a happy Moslem underclass who whistled while they worked for their Christian masters. They could exploit it after the fact. Syria was also later to the game than the PLO and Israeli retaliation against the PLO, so their motives were more likely aggressive containment through proxies, than direct action against Israel. Every outsider is dirty in Lebanese blood and distruction, not just Syria, and the conservative Christian Lebanese are pretty dirty in the whole mess too.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Well... I guess the US can pretty much do whatever the US wants to do in this part of the world, as these actions show. I mean, what makes something legal or not. If you can't get punished for it... ?? Still, what a mess.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Not much of a front, particularly when the Syrian sponsored militia (primarily Amal) was also fighting Hesbollah and PLO backed elements.

Why would a growing Moslem population in an ostensibly democratic country need outside influence to be discontent, when the supposedly democratic rulers played games with representation that would embarass the Jim Crow south? And used that corrupted representation system to preserve economic and political advantage in favor of the conservative Christians? The French didn't encourage us to rebel against England, we figured it out on our own. If anything, there would be more influence from Nasser and his brand of socialist Arab nationalism.

Any time you have political and economic power split along ethnic or religious lines, you've got a powder keg waiting to go off. The Syrians couldn't create that condition out of a happy Moslem underclass who whistled while they worked for their Christian masters. They could exploit it after the fact. Syria was also later to the game than the PLO and Israeli retaliation against the PLO, so their motives were more likely aggressive containment through proxies, than direct action against Israel. Every outsider is dirty in Lebanese blood and distruction, not just Syria, and the conservative Christian Lebanese are pretty dirty in the whole mess too.

While I generally agree with your analysis, I doubt that the unhappy muslim underclass bought their weapons at the local wal-mart. Some country was involved in arming them and my money says it was Syria.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by panag


hi ,

he never saw Tel-aviv then , ......

or Haifa , ......

but it was indeed an amazing city , unfortunatly even with all the rebuilding going on now it shall never again be the same , ....

have a nice day

Indeed, please correct my statement to the Arab ME. (and except apologies for excluding Tel Aviv which he did visit and was impressed with)

[DanS]

Why would a growing Moslem population in an ostensibly democratic country need outside influence to be discontent, when the supposedly democratic rulers played games with representation that would embarass the Jim Crow south? And used that corrupted representation system to preserve economic and political advantage in favor of the conservative Christians?

I have talked with some of those conservative Christians. Really hard core folks.

[Panag]

Originally posted by PLATO1003


Indeed, please correct my statement to the Arab ME. (and except apologies for excluding Tel Aviv which he did visit and was impressed with)

hi ,

well it was the pearl of the orient at one time , but so many buildings where destroyed , ...... its an outright shame , when israel put on the un's agenda together with the french to protect the buildings also the un refused , russia put up its veto , ......

they are rebuilding it , and its worth a visist now , but there is something missing , if you have seen it with your own eyes before you find the current beirut empty , ...... its like the city's sould has been destroyed , ......

have a nice day