Avatar feed
Responses: 3
Col Rebecca Lorraine
4
4
0
Many feel we should not engage and let the pot simmer. In the early days of OIF, it was suspected that much of Saddam's arsenal of WMD materials were transported into Syria. We have already made our stand on the "red line". Should America interfere more directly?
(4)
Comment
(0)
SPC James Harsh
SPC James Harsh
>1 y
Col Rebecca Lorraine I know I don't follow much of what goes on there. I think that ship has sailed and around that time the line was drawn there were people living over there in blackout. Today, all the people left and I think we look like dummies.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Col Rebecca Lorraine
Col Rebecca Lorraine
>1 y
SPC James Harsh - I believe you are right.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGT Tony Clifford
SGT Tony Clifford
>1 y
For historical context. During the Iran Iraq war, both sides used chemical weapons on multiple occasions. We never intervened because it was not our fight.

Fast forward to today and both sides in the Syrian civil war are using chemical weapons. Why should we get involved. There are no good guys, only bad guys. Getting involved will only cost money and lives with no benefit for our people. The people of Syria will resent us no matter what we do, so we should save our money and lives and let them hate us for free.
(1)
Reply
(0)
LTC Owner
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
SGT Tony Clifford - Well said.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC James Harsh
3
3
0
Whenever the use of chemical weapons arises, it seems to fall out of the news cycle quickly. A good guess if anyone got to asking would be that the weapons were acquired from Iraq. Any other method would prove aided from a government that is probably a US ally or stolen from Syria where those reports were dismissed. Sweep Sweep
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Capt Seid Waddell
1
1
0
Maybe Obama should draw another red line in the shifting sands there.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close