Well you say you think we're going to get boots on the ground, yet President Obama says that is not an option at all. What the U.N wants to do is stop the Syrian president from killing his people, but possibly leave him in control with limited power. Why would they do thia? Take Osama Bin Laden for example. When we (the U.S.) went in and took him out of power, this left radicals with an opportunity to take over the country. Hence, Afghanistan is now the center of terrorism... Though we shouldn't have went in there in the first place..

RicardoHill-Henry wrote Well you say you think we're going to get boots on the ground, yet President Obama says that is not an option at all. What the U.N wants to do is stop the Syrian president from killing his people, but possibly leave him in control with limited power. Why would they do thia? Take Osama Bin Laden for example. When we (the U.S.) went in and took him out of power, this left radicals with an opportunity to take over the country. Hence, Afghanistan is now the center of terrorism... Though we shouldn't have went in there in the first place..

That would cause us to pretty much have a coup. Meaning that we would have to stop all funding in Syria leading to have the Radicals, because they have funding from us (Yes we are supplying the rebels which include them) But they're also getting funding from Russia and China leaving them with the upper hand on the rebels who are fighting for democracy. Are you saying we should like HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of people get gassed and killed due to them wanting a say in what the government does. That is what we fight for democracy it doesn't matter where. Anywhere we will support it.

Joe_ wrote

RicardoHill-Henry wrote Well you say you think we're going to get boots on the ground, yet President Obama says that is not an option at all. What the U.N wants to do is stop the Syrian president from killing his people, but possibly leave him in control with limited power. Why would they do thia? Take Osama Bin Laden for example. When we (the U.S.) went in and took him out of power, this left radicals with an opportunity to take over the country. Hence, Afghanistan is now the center of terrorism... Though we shouldn't have went in there in the first place..

That would cause us to pretty much have a coup. Meaning that we would have to stop all funding in Syria leading to have the Islamic extremist, because they have funding from us (Yes we are supplying the rebels which include them) But they're also getting funding from Russia and China leaving them with the upper hand on the rebels who are fighting for democracy. Are you saying we should like HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of people get gassed and killed due to them wanting a say in what the government does. That is what we fight for democracy it doesn't matter where. Anywhere we will support it.

Nothing I said even remotely pointed towards that view at all... I'm not even sure if you were speaking to me honestly, because nothing said seemed to be relevant to what I said.

Honestly, I think America should do the right thing, and not engage. They're in debt, deep, in debt. I may not know much, as I am Canadian and don't pay much attention to economic dilemmas and such, but they should just let the U.N and the others deal with it. I just hope Canada doesn't get involved in anyway, as anything could go wrong in this situation. That is just my opinion, and you all have your own, it could be the same, it might be the complete opposite.

Flaon wrote Honestly, I think America should do the right thing, and not engage. They're in debt, deep, in debt. I may not know much, as I am Canadian and don't pay much attention to economic dilemmas and such, but they should just let the U.N and the others deal with it. I just hope Canada doesn't get involved in anyway, as anything could go wrong in this situation. That is just my opinion, and you all have your own, it could be the same, it might be the complete opposite.

Lol does Canada ever get involved?

That the U.N wants to do is stop the Syrian president from killing his people, but possibly leave him in control with limited power. Why would they do thia? Take Osama Bin Laden for example. When we (the U.S.) went in and took him out of power, this left radicals with an opportunity to take over the country.

This is the response to that:
That would cause us to pretty much have a coup(If we took him out of power completly). Meaning that we would have to stop all funding in Syria leading to have the Islamic extremist, because they have funding from us (Yes we are supplying the rebels which include them) But they're also getting funding from Russia and China leaving them with the upper hand on the rebels who are fighting for democracy

Hence, Afghanistan is now the center of terrorism... Though we shouldn't have went in there in the first place..

This I more then likely took it a different way then you meant. I thought by "Shouldn't have went in there anyway" As we should do nothing at all. That is my fault on that. I misread. I read it as, we should of never been evolved in the first place if you see where I am coming from.

---

Flaon wrote Honestly, I think America should do the right thing, and not engage. They're in debt, deep, in debt. I may not know much, as I am Canadian and don't pay much attention to economic dilemmas and such, but they should just let the U.N and the others deal with it. I just hope Canada doesn't get involved in anyway, as anything could go wrong in this situation. That is just my opinion, and you all have your own, it could be the same, it might be the complete opposite.

Who is to stop them if the United States doesn't go in. That might lead to France and Turkey not going in. Since Brittian is out. What is the U.N going to do? smack them on the wrists? Let them off with a warning. There's no other major power in the world that will go in and stop this. When we let the U.N take their time and find a good punishment, something else has happened in the world. Like how North Korea is trading missile parts with Cuba. They need certain countries to follow out and the United States has been that country so far.

RicardoHill-Henry wrote

Flaon wrote Honestly, I think America should do the right thing, and not engage. They're in debt, deep, in debt. I may not know much, as I am Canadian and don't pay much attention to economic dilemmas and such, but they should just let the U.N and the others deal with it. I just hope Canada doesn't get involved in anyway, as anything could go wrong in this situation. That is just my opinion, and you all have your own, it could be the same, it might be the complete opposite.

Lol does Canada ever get involved?

Yes actually. It does. We sent over 100,000 troops into Afghanistan to support the Americans. They did a good job and helped well. But the ones who lost their live will not be forgotten, Canadian, or American.

Obama is dumb can't wait tell he is out of service! Hurry up already !

Because this is 'Murica and we police the world!

But really though you do have a point, I guess it would be smart to let Turkey and France make the first move and intervene if the need arises.

RicardoHill-Henry wrote

Flaon wrote Honestly, I think America should do the right thing, and not engage. They're in debt, deep, in debt. I may not know much, as I am Canadian and don't pay much attention to economic dilemmas and such, but they should just let the U.N and the others deal with it. I just hope Canada doesn't get involved in anyway, as anything could go wrong in this situation. That is just my opinion, and you all have your own, it could be the same, it might be the complete opposite.

Lol does Canada ever get involved?

Canada declared war on Germany in WW2 and were one of the 3 countries that landed on the beaches of Normandy on D-Day.
They do more than people think.