#1 Dating Site for Successful Singles and Admirers
Millionaire Blogs > MillionDollarBab's blogs > Syria
Syria Sort by:
Author
MillionDollarBab
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 134
Posted on Tue, Aug 27, 2013 08:25

What will happen in Syria? everyone is wondering.  I can't imagine much will happen because we really don't want to get involved.  When we heard that Iran seemed to be building nurclear weapons, did we take action?  Oh, let's see.  Well, there were speeches about sanctions.  There were warnings to Israel not to attack Iran, but that seemed to be what we hoped would happen.  Let them deal with it.  Now we hear that there is a civil war in Syria and that chemical weapons are being used.  Our leaders have said in the past that this would be crossing that invisible line and wouldn't be tolerated.  So I'd say now our leaders are mostly trying to figure out how to appear to have not tolerated that, while effectively ignoring it.  We'll send a message.  Many, many firecrackers will be exploded.  Stay tuned. 

I could see this going south for us in all kinds of ways, mostly amounting to terrorists retaliating against us for whatever we did.  What did happen to those nuclear weapons?  I think I heard that the Israelis used an electronic attack against them.  We don't really know.  I suppose the Iranians are still sitting in underground bunkers complaining about being hacked.  Another thing I've heard is that Iranian nuclear physicists keep being killed mysteriously.  

Meanwhile, the stock market is perplexed.  Well, are we going to stop eating donuts now?  Why is Krispy Kreme taking a hit on this news?  But wait, Chevron is up.  Why?  I guess there is speculation that our domestic supply of oil will help us if we behave badly enough in the eyes of the Saudis that they cut off our oil.  Other purveyors of domestic oil are also up.  But then why is Union Pacific down? Wouldn't all the need for increased use of transportation benefit them?  

A friend once told me that every time they had ever seen economic turmoil in this country, there had soon been a war.  They felt that the purpose of the war was 100% to buoy the economy.  Is this so?  I don't know.   

There is one thing about the idea of an attack on Damacus that really bothers me.  Isaiah 17:1 The burden of Damascus.  Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and shall be a ruinous heap.

This prophesy has never been fulfilled.  If I lived in Damascus, I'd move.



Bab : )

Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
Jenkneee
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 658
Posted on Mon, Sep 09, 2013 21:38

We should NOT intervene in Syria. There is no evidence that Assad made any chem attacks BUT there is arguable evidence that some rebels are responsible for chem attacks, even a possible accident in handling some of the chemicals. Some of these rebels are tied to who we consider our enemies, including Al-Qaeda.

 

 

 

I am sorry for the deaths and suffering of any innocent people but helping to create a possible  WW3 is not what we should do.  Know your enemies. I think our president is the enemy of our country and should get impeached. Proganda is heavily in use by Obama. I absolutely do not trust him.

 

 

Please sign the petition-NO to WAR in Syria.

 

 

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/no-war-syria/QcTV4m0F



Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
MillionDollarBab
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 134
Posted on Tue, Sep 03, 2013 11:19

Hi Diana,

Well put.  

Could our leaders have not looked down the road and had a continguency plan in the first place?  They could all have batted this around for months, quietly, and consulted with allies to see what their reaction would probably be.  There could have been thought given to this before it happened, with everyone who had a voice weighing in, and a well thought out plan enacted in that event.  

We could have had a trigger point and acted immediately using the element of surprise.  We've lost that advantage.  That would have been more "surgical."



Bab : )

Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
Diana3316
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 1191
Posted on Mon, Sep 02, 2013 22:29

It’s a “No” from the British Parliament.  Seared in the minds and hearts of the British public are the still fresh/painful lessons learned from Iraq.  Surely the decision resulted from those lessons.  It is understandable.

 

Iraq remains a troubled and unstable environment.  The result of American preemptive military action is a seemingly unrelenting wave of violence pounding Iraq today.  The Bush Administration legacy which led to an invasion under false premises and faulty intelligence that yielded over 4000 Americans dead, no WMDs and a safe harbor for terrorists where none existed before, also looms over the White House as they try to convince Americans, the Congress and the world….that Syria will not be a repeat.

 

So what’s the purpose of all this?  It’s not to evoke a regime change as in Iraq.  It’s to enforce a critical international norm of ‘No Use of Chemical/Biological Weapons of Mass Destruction’. 

 

Let’s be clear.  There is no hope for UN resolution.  There is no hope for a NATO action.  There will be no UK joint endeavor.  It’s down to us and our good friend France.

 

There is no doubt military intervention in Syria is politically unpopular.  We are ALL weary of war, the billions spent and seeing our babies come home in flag draped coffins.  But it seems as if a red line has been crossed.  Hundreds of innocents including women and little children gassed in their sleep.  But Reagan knew Saddam Hussein gassed his people too and didn’t do anything about it.   So now what?

 

A lot of members of Congress were beginning to make a lot of noise:  “We want to be consulted; We have questions; We need answers.”  Well good.  We the public want YOU on record with a vote!  You wanted in?  Well now you’re in!!  Well…..what will it be?  Will you do it?  Lolol….they’re so concerned, they won’t even come back from vacation.

 

As far as our British friends…..it’s ok.  We don’t need your military involvement.  We have enough military might for this one.   But if we decide to do this thing…we will need and hope for your political support.  Thank you!!



Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
MillionDollarBab
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 134
Posted on Sun, Sep 01, 2013 10:09

Hi Sarah, 

I wonder who would replace Assad too.  I don't know that they would be better.  Also we have laws against removing heads of states.  



Bab : )

Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
MissMonteCarlo
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 1700
Posted on Sun, Sep 01, 2013 05:15

Syria is such a complex issue. I am glad that the UK voted no to action as how can you vote on action with so many unanswered questions. We have learnt from Iraq and Afghan the importance of evidence before battle and the importance of having a plan. I believe if the United Nations has evidence to indicate that it was the Assad regime then action should be taken as that is breaking international law. I believe action should be taken as the United Nations. Not a Britain and USA thing or French and USA thing. Although I do realise there are flaws in the way the United Nations operate as Russia and China tend to vote against action. I do understand Russia's perspective too. They'd rather have Assad on their borders than some possible muslim brother rebel group which may pose problems for Russia. I think it is important to wait for the evidence to emerge from the United Nations and is presented to the world. I also think before any actions is taken that we are prepared for the consequences military action may cause. We are assuming by dropping bombs that will deter Syria and other countries from being brutal. This might be a spark that ignites a huge problem in the middle east and for us.

 

 

 

Sarah :-/



Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
MillionDollarBab
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 134
Posted on Fri, Aug 30, 2013 06:48

I think WalMart helped Krispy Kreme because WalMart donuts aren't as good.  Therefore the donut market is driven to Krispy Kreme.  



Bab : )

Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
eric555
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 12
Posted on Thu, Aug 29, 2013 18:41

I wonder if syria is just filler material for the news there were plenty of worse things to go after so for them to bark at something small didn't make sence  but politics never realy seemed all that logical to me krispy cream hmm wonder if walmart helped or hurt them  they were plenty popular as a donut shop tough i don't see people getting still warm donuts from walmart tough dunkin donuts did realy good i wonder can i get good damascus steel from damascus but yea middle east isn't for me either seems too shakey



Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
Follow - Email me when people comment