USA opens up economic war against Syria!

[chequita guevara]

Re: USA opens up economic war against Syria!

Originally posted by Ted Striker
My feeling is that Washington is going to do everything it can to have a war with Syria without actually invading.

I think you're wrong. There's going to be a war, because Bush's poll numbers have slipped below 50% and there's bipartisan anger about his lying on Iraq.

[Az]

I don't think that anger over a war can be solved by another war, speaking from the pov of polls & public opinion.

[Dinner]

There is not going to be a war. The US is very pissed about Syria not closing it's borders and allowing Syria to be used as a transite point for terrorists going to Iraq. It's also pissed off by Assad allowed over a billion dollars of money Saddam & Co looted from Iraq to be transported and laundered through Syria. Reportedly, Assad took a cut of the money and allowed the rest to go through. Lastly, the three most active Islamic terror organizations in the middle east all recieve financial and llegistical support from Syria.

Some people out there just don't seem to get it. Ever since 9/11 the US has been serious about going after any country which sponsor's terrorism. Why is that so hard to understand?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Azazel
I don't think that anger over a war can be solved by another war, speaking from the pov of polls & public opinion.

he's just getting in a dig, Az. Bush's numbers are already turning around, in part due to improved economic news. And the bipartisan anger is about failed intelligence - not all dems, and no prominent republicans, think Dubya actually lied about anything signficant (there a lot of quibbling going on about the word "imminent" - Bush in his State of the Union address explicity said IRaq was NOT an imminent threat, we shouldnt wait for it to become imminent - diligent research has dug up quotes from admin officials that sound very much like "imminent" threat, even if they dont use the "I" word. This is basically what we call "an inside the beltway issue" (ie one of concern in Washington) The rest of the country is watching the casualty count in Iraq, and the economy.

[oedo]

I also don´t believe, there will be a war. Bush´s time is running out, there´s only one year left. that´s certainly not enough to get another invasion force ready. plus, there are no allies in sight, not even GB would support this kind of kamikaze commando. and unlike Iraq, Syria DOES have WMD, so an attack would be too risky.

[Dinner]

It has nothing to do with Syria having or not having WMD. They wouldn't use them for the same reason Saddam wouldn't use them in GW1 and Hitler didn't in WW2; we have lots more plus the delivery systems to get them where we want and he doesn't thus he won't use them.

This is going to be a cold war type situation where the US goes out of its way to make life hard for the Syrians until the Syrians start doing what we want them to do. Such a method succeeded in getting Libya to give up terrorism so it just might work to get Syria to give up terrorism.

[Az]

Syria DOES have WMD,

That's what they said about Iraq lol.

[oedo]

but wasn´t Iraq between the wars a cold-war-like situation, too? how could the USA set Syria under more (or at least equal) pressure than they did against Iraq?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Azazel

Syria DOES have WMD,

That's what they said about Iraq lol.

And Israel.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
he's just getting in a dig, Az. Bush's numbers are already turning around,

It depends on who's polls you watch. What's killing Bush in the middle is the $87 billion request when our states are going bankrupt. On the right, there is anger and concern over the White House leaking the name of a CIA agent, and not seeming very concerned to get to the bottom of it.

[oedo]

Originally posted by Azazel

Syria DOES have WMD,

That's what they said about Iraq lol.

of course they have. guess where Saddam is hiding all his nukes.

[Az]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
And Israel.

Nah, we don't have any WMDs. I don't know what you're talking about.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


On the right, there is anger and concern over the White House leaking the name of a CIA agent, and not seeming very concerned to get to the bottom of it.

Correction "Over ALLEGTIONS that the White House named a CIA agent". Its possible it was the CIA that leaked it, or that someone in the white house or otherwise didnt know she had been a covert op - Novak i think says it was open knowledge that she was CIA.

[oedo]

Originally posted by Azazel
Nah, we don't have any WMDs. I don't know what you're talking about.

you just were in the army, right? now, that´s what I call a first-hand source.

[SnowFire]

There's going to be no war against Syria as long as the current government is in power. They are burdened with the terrible knowledge that Israel could probably kick their butts, and the same goes double for the US of A. They still have to play the part of being indignant and opposed to their citizenry, though, even if they can't do anything about it.

The problem is, if we force the Syrian government to concede to our demands and they lose face, that government might fall and braver wackos could take power who want to fight no matter who wins. THAT could be a problem.