Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Syria, use this initial post to comment over the time of the coming "war"...

As much as I doubt there are any "facts" regarding the Syria situation, there at least will be endless arguing, just like Iraq... The interesting position for the MSM now is that their favorite "American Idol, President Obama, wil be suffering the same moves and miscalculations Bush suffered.

The doves are now trapped like birds in a cage because the head dove is faced with killing folks just like Bush did.  Ironic, no?

The cries that chemical weapons were used was a major stepping stone to Iraq, wasn't it?
I project that by the weekend we will have been killing folks in the Middle East, it's hard to hit every target without collateral damage, just has it always has been....

I think the best course of action is to do nothing.  Yep, walk away, look away, stay away.  I'm no dove but I can say I can smell a rat, and this stinks for us, as a country.  The "Middle East" consumed England in the 30's and 40's and we've been being dragged down by it since then.  We trained folks like Bib Laden to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and the result was 9-11.  We've been in Afghanistan ever since and all we have to show is white crosses in military grave yards.

You can't fight "God"

There are two Gods in the region, ok three, however to import the Christian God across the Med. sea hasn't really worked to well yet. So I say......

Walk away from this mess, quick and don't look back, the sands of Syria have nothing but quicksand to offer our country, no resources, no nothing.




17 comments:

  1. Copied from posting elsewhere:

    Robert Fisk, The Independent, 8/27/13
    "If Barack Obama decides to attack the Syrian regime, he has ensured – for the very first time in history – that the United States will be on the same side as al-Qa’ida.

    "The men who destroyed so many thousands on 9/11 will then be fighting alongside the very nation whose innocents they so cruelly murdered almost exactly 12 years ago."

    Karl Denniger, Market Ticker,8/28/13
    "The biggest problem is that while I'm quite-convinced that someone used chemical weapons in Syria I am not convinced and it certainly has not been proved that it was the Syrian Government that did so.

    "Never mind all the connections that appear to be present between the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaida, the "rebels" in Syria and the botched operation in Benghazi, among others

    "Al-Qaida is a declared enemy of the United States. This is not a matter of speculation, it is by their own name, hand and actions, including the attacks of 9/11 and those that both preceded and followed that event.

    "But attacking the Syrian Government, irrespective of the justification, would absolutely constitute providing material aid and comfort to the militants who are known to be Al-Qaida affiliated.

    "If, as I suspect, it turns out that it was the Al-Qaida-linked rebels who actually used the chemical weapons then we will have joined a war on the side of Al-Qaida after they used chemical munitions!"

    "Treason is the act of waging war against one's own nation or consciously and purposefully aiding its enemies in a time of war.

    We're providing material aid and comfort to a declared enemy of the United States."

    "This one can't be justified folks, no matter which way the facts on the ground fall."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We were on the side of Al Qui'da in the Iraq war, aka Dessert Storm. Also sided with Al Qui'da in the Iran/Russia war. Remember?

      Delete
    2. Actually I don't recall al Qaida in either of those instances.

      Not formed until mid 1988 it would be difficult to be in sympathies during the Russo Persian territorial dispute of 1804 et al.

      Perhaps you could enlighten us on the Dessert[sic] Storm scenario.

      Delete
    3. Sadam hated the extremists and kept them under check. When we invaded Iraq all the government's arms caches were up for grabs and most of them were taken by the Muslim extremists, whatever they called themselves at that time.

      Delete
    4. In a 2004 BBC article entitled "Al-Qaeda's origins and links", the BBC wrote:

      During the anti-Soviet jihad Bin Laden and his fighters received American and Saudi funding. Some analysts believe Bin Laden himself had security training from the CIA.

      Delete
    5. I meant Russia/Afghanistan war, not Russia/Iran, sorry.

      Delete
    6. The Russian incursion began very, very late 1979 against an insurgency begun in 1975 long before al Qaida was formed, mid August 1988. Supporting what was Mujahideen should not be confused.

      Desert Storm was response to Iraqi incursion into Kuwait, 1991 and no correlation to al Qaida at that time and only after bin Laden's rejection by Saud in favor of the US coalition to which bin Ladin took great umbrage. At no time did we have sympathies with al Qaida and particularly following embassy bombings in 1992 and most certainly not 2003.

      Most assuredly, Saddam's greatest good was the control of extremist factions. Sadly, we removed the only balance check in the region to Iran.

      I grant you the arms caches were a serious error on our part. The philosophy of the time, ie, minimum forces on a 'blitzkrieg' if you will. They should have been destroyed in place but there were insufficient Engineer forces nor where infantry to guard them at the time to do so.

      Delete
  2. I agree we should stay out of it. I once took a college course in Old Testament Theology, we learned that Elohim, the God of Abraham is the same as Allah. In fact the Muslims trace their ancestry back to Abraham, the Patriarch. So, the "people of the book", meaning Christians, Jews and Muslims,worship the same God. However the Jews and Muslims do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mick, the Muslims don't have an ancestry as Muslim is a practitioner of Islam thus not a race.

    There is only one "people of the book" in the only context that matters; the Hebrews, the 12 tribes of Jacob, the Jews. The title of "people of the book" or "God's Chosen People" was awarded as a result of the Abraham Covenant.

    You don't need any course work. Just pick up a Bible. That part is explained in the first dang book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "People of the Book" is a Muslim phrase, not mine, that is how they refer to Themselves, Christians and Jews.

      Delete
    2. I was told by a Bangladeshi colleague of mine that Muslims trace their core beliefs back to Abraham.

      Delete
    3. If it helps, I think the Muslims trace their roots back to Ahraham because he supposedly had a son, Ishmael, through a union with one of the servants. Abrahams's wife, Sarah, had Abraham banish Ishmael and his mother when she had Isaac.

      For whatever that's worth.

      Delete
  4. I think the Obama Administration has been circling this drain since the Arab Spring. Assad was not supposed to last this long. We have sent so many assets against him and yet he remains. The line in the sand remark was the precursor for wide support for invasion thus giving the Americans more of a motive to do the chemical attack than Assad, who has none.

    Some are saying we did it (or at least supported it) at the behest of Israel. But recall Netanyahu denouncing the rebels eating organs and calling the rebels "terrorists". Not really language for rebel support.

    Anything we sit here and say is crap though as only the power brokers understand their sociopathy. What we know is that the Bible says Damascus will be destroyed and I believe that is certain. Jimmy Swaggart says that particular Isaiah prophecy was fulfilled by the Assyrians defeating Rezin as described in II Kings, but Isaiah says completely destroyed in one night and never rebuilt.

    Whatever be the case, God's Will be done. You can well bet there are people who think they can direct history either for or against God and that is what is primarily going on in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Disagree Jimbo. God gave us free will so we would have the power to side with good or evil. Those who choose evil, and their number is legion, do so at their peril, nonetheless they exist.

      Delete
    2. "God gave us free will so we would have the power to side with good or evil."

      Free Will is an interesting concept. The jury is still out on it. See Arminianism vs Calvinism. I have not determined for myself which is right as both cases are well argued.

      The Calvinistic side says you, me and everyone has been know since before time existed and we are exactly how God made us. Whether or not we are saved comes from His Sovereign will, not ours. "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?" Romans 9:21.

      "Those who choose evil, and their number is legion, do so at their peril, nonetheless they exist."

      To that, there is no doubt.

      Delete
  5. Jean, yes, the Arabs do. My argument was based in the semantics of it, ie not all Muslims could trace their roots to Abraham. Ishmael and Esau are the two non-Hebrew off shoots of Abramham. The covenant is extended through Isaac and Jacob as it is written.

    Mick, the story of Muhammad and thus Islam is that he paid the priests to read him the Old Testament and he fashioned a new religion for the purposes of control based on the main tenants. Basically, he chewed off the part that Isaac and Jacob stole the convenant from their respective brothers which is partly true. Trouble is, nearly 600 years before Muhammad could make these claims, Jesus himself said the covenant runs through Jacob.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.

    The Obama administration is set to presented its intelligence findings in an effort prove that Assad’s forces were behind last week’s attack, despite American officials admitting to the New York Times that there is no “smoking gun” that directly links President Assad to the attack.

    Intercepted intelligence revealed that the Syrian Defense Ministry was making “panicked” phone calls to Syria’s chemical weapons department demanding answers in the hours after the attack, suggesting that it was not ordered by Assad’s forces.
    ~~~
    As I recall, intercepted “panic” phone calls were also made by Iraqi forces (Ministry to field unit) in 2003 and were totally misinterpreted to represent WMDs.

    ReplyDelete