Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
and then

75,000 US Troops Might Be Needed

48 posts in this topic

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/world/middleeast/pentagon-sees-seizing-syria-chemical-arms-as-vast-task.html?_r=0

While the chaos is going on in Israel/Gaza, Hizballah fighters are training near chemical weapon depots in Syria. The chemical weapons are probably the ONLY thing that would cause the US to be dragged into Syria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

next

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.nytimes.c...-task.html?_r=0

While the chaos is going on in Israel/Gaza, Hizballah fighters are training near chemical weapon depots in Syria. The chemical weapons are probably the ONLY thing that would cause the US to be dragged into Syria.

The U.S.A has Navy Seals and Delta force so I hardly thing that 75000 troops would be used to contain a dozen or so ragamuffins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.S.A has Navy Seals and Delta force so I hardly thing that 75000 troops would be used to contain a dozen or so ragamuffins.

The article mentions about 40 separate sites that would have to be seized, secured and then held for long enough to either destroy the stuff or ship it away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be glib ,but it makes me wish there really was an Iron Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would hardly call Hezbollah Ragamuffins.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would hardly call Hezbollah Ragamuffins.

Why not the people in their own Country are scared crapless of them, but we certainly are not.Just a bunch of evil lunatics.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US running into another war again? Warmongers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch a claim come out that a sizable portion of the chemical weapons are , "most likely' the 'missing' Saddam Hussein/Iraqi stash. There by, after all, justifying the invasion / occupation / reorganization / and $o on.

John Bolton, on Good Morning America will be a good delivery boy for that.

*gag*

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US running into another war again? Warmongers.

The US and coalition forces stop unstable, militant groups having the power to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Warmongers

Edited by Professor Buzzkill
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kool-aid.gif
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

75k troops... LMFAO

Yeah right. The US has Drones, helicopter gunships and all sort of technological marvels. Modern military technology turns things liek that into massacres. Look at how the US tanks just blitzed the Iraqi tanks and that was before there was even more upgrades added to their tech.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... but if we the coalition attack, no chemical weapons will be found. However it will soon be determined that they were transported back through Iraq . . and into Iran .

*

Edited by lightly
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could very well end up in the middle of Syria and the mess going on with Israel and Gaza. And we thought we were going to bring our troops home. I'm seriously sick of it all but I bet I'm not half as sick of it as the people having to live in the middle of it. I wonder what those people would like to see happen.

If Hizballah gets in the middle of the Gaza/Israeli conflict we could end up in that. Hizballah is much better armed than Hamas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something else I am concerned about is Syria's violence seems to be going beyond its borders. That is causing even more problems with the neighbors. If it doesn't stop Assad will have to worry about his neighbors attacking him.

All this violence is tearing that country apart. I wish they could get someone in power that would stand for all the people in that country and write laws that are fair for all. Keep Muslim law out of it, do what is right for the people. Then the militants need to be arrested if they persist in their efforts to tear Syria apart. I guess that scenario would be a fantasy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The US and coalition forces stop unstable, militant groups having the power to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Warmongers

The US and coalition forces stop unstable, militant groups having the power to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people, only so they can have all that power instead.

Hiroshima, anybody? They don't truly give a damn about protecting other people.

So, yes, the US government/military are Warmongers. Nothing more than a seizure of power.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US and coalition forces stop unstable, militant groups having the power to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Warmongers

Hang on, you lot are dragging us into this again?

Edited by Wearer of Hats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic seemed pertinent to the region since everything else seems to be giving Assad cover for his dirty work. It was not posted up to start an argument. It appears that most did not even read all the article. No one has said they are scheduled or mobilized - just that this is the number that would be required IF an intervention is necessary. And IF such an intervention is necessary and doesn't happen then I imagine that a horrible tragedy will occur somewhere in the US or Europe within the near future. Not every single event in the world is a conspiracy theory folks.... THIS stuff isn't a car bomb. THIS stuff can kills thousands at a blow.

Edited by and then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic seemed pertinent to the region since everything else seems to be giving Assad cover for his dirty work. It was not posted up to start an argument. It appears that most did not even read all the article. No one has said they are scheduled or mobilized - just that this is the number that would be required IF an intervention is necessary. And IF such an intervention is necessary and doesn't happen then I imagine that a horrible tragedy will occur somewhere in the US or Europe within the near future. Not every single event in the world is a conspiracy theory folks.... THIS stuff isn't a car bomb. THIS stuff can kills thousands at a blow.

Sorry, And Then. Buzzkill replied to something I said and it went downhill from there, if you like. Even though the US government (aswell as my own government) are warmongers.

And I don't think anybody mentioned anything about conspiracies? Unless I'm mistaken.

Take care. I'm sorry if I caused anything to blow out of proportion.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting excerpts from the OP article:

Mr. Obama has been clear for more than a year that he would resist direct American intervention, but in August he said one circumstance would cause him to revisit that position. “A red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized,” he said at a news conference. “That would change my calculus.”

Mr. Obama brought those concerns up again in a news conference on Wednesday, saying that the United States was in close contact with Turkey and Jordan “and obviously Israel, which is having already grave concerns as we do about, for example, movements of chemical weapons that might occur in such a chaotic atmosphere and that could have an impact not just within Syria but on the region as a whole.”

The estimation that it would take 75,000 troops to neutralize the chemical weapons grew out of what Mr. Obama, in his August news conference, referred to as extensive contingency planning for how the United States would respond if the chemical weapons were on the move or appeared vulnerable.

“The problem is that you can’t just pick this stuff up and ship it out of the country,” said one senior military official who has studied the problem. The chances of contamination of nearby Syrian towns, and of attacks on the effort to move the weapons, were simply too high. Because many of the containers holding the material are old, or of unknown reliability, the risk of leakage is high.

As a result, the official said, much of the chemical stockpiles might have to be destroyed in place. That is a lengthy, dangerous job, and would require enormous force protection around the sites. When the United States went through similar efforts to destroy its own stockpiles — under strict environmental regulations that would likely not apply in Syria — the process took years.

A second official familiar with the plans disputed the idea that all of the stockpiles would have to be destroyed in place. Some, he suggested, could be airlifted out for destruction elsewhere or burial at sea. “There are several options,” he said, “but all carry varying degrees of risk.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something else I am concerned about is Syria's violence seems to be going beyond its borders. That is causing even more problems with the neighbors. If it doesn't stop Assad will have to worry about his neighbors attacking him.

All this violence is tearing that country apart. I wish they could get someone in power that would stand for all the people in that country and write laws that are fair for all. Keep Muslim law out of it, do what is right for the people. Then the militants need to be arrested if they persist in their efforts to tear Syria apart. I guess that scenario would be a fantasy.

Yes exactly, human rights should always come before religion. :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US and coalition forces stop unstable, militant groups having the power to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Warmongers

WHAT?! LMFAO

If that is so then why do they want to put a militant group in power of Syria.... LOL

I get why the rebels are fighting Assad. I uderstand their reasons and agree with them, but do you really think the US goverment would help them for rightous reasons?! LMFAO

How long have psychotic religious fanatics raped, tortured and massacred the people of Africa and other surrounding countries, yet the US has never intervened. At least not properly.

The US goverment never goes to these places to save or help innocent people. They go for the benefits of war (selling weapons etc) and the spoils.

Also think about 2 things here for a second:

Firstly what the rebals in Syria are doing is not so different to what Al Qaeda SUPPOSEDLY did to the US and UK. Yet we come down on them like a ton of bricks and then support another group of people who are trying to achieve the same goal in a different country. How are people too stupid to see this?! LOL

Even more ironic that some of these rebels are in fact Al Qaeda.... Ah yes lets help topple a goverment and put our sworn enemy in charge of the country. LOL

Now the second thing is, anyone who is a fan of star wars or has seen it.... You do know that "the empire" is based on the US right? That makes people like Al Qaeda the rebelion.... This is a good way to start seeing the US goverment and Elites for what thye truly are.

NOTE: I do not support Al Qaeda in any way, Unlike the US goverment... *cough* (training them and selling weapons etc <-- Comfirmed FACT by Hilary Clinton)

Edited by Coffey
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WHAT?! LMFAO

If that is so then why do they want to put a militant group in power of Syria.... LOL

I get why the rebels are fighting Assad. I uderstand their reasons and agree with them, but do you really think the US goverment would help them for rightous reasons?! LMFAO

How long have psychotic religious fanatics raped, tortured and massacred the people of Africa and other surrounding countries, yet the US has never intervened. At least not properly.

The US goverment never goes to these places to save or help innocent people. They go for the benefits of war (selling weapons etc) and the spoils.

Also think about 2 things here for a second:

Firstly what the rebals in Syria are doing is not so different to what Al Qaeda SUPPOSEDLY did to the US and UK. Yet we come down on them like a ton of bricks and then support another group of people who are trying to achieve the same goal in a different country. How are people too stupid to see this?! LOL

Even more ironic that some of these rebels are in fact Al Qaeda.... Ah yes lets help topple a goverment and put our sworn enemy in charge of the country. LOL

Now the second thing is, anyone who is a fan of star wars or has seen it.... You do know that "the empire" is based on the US right? That makes people like Al Qaeda the rebelion.... This is a good way to start seeing the US goverment and Elites for what thye truly are.

NOTE: I do not support Al Qaeda in any way, Unlike the US goverment... *cough* (training them and selling weapons etc <-- Comfirmed FACT by Hilary Clinton)

What you describe there Coffey is the way nations do business. They operate out of self interests. ALL nations do this. The reason the US is held to a different standard is the rhetoric that comes out of our government. I think it's hypocritical to portray ourselves as one thing while doing another. Syria, in fact, has no value to the US except as a problem that must be dealt with if the chemical weapons stocks they are KNOWN to have (by international observation) become unsecured. Then the US has a real reason to intervene. Until then I give credit to Obama for keeping our people out of that meat grinder. Truth is that the US didn't benefit at all from the Libya incursion, we were doing that as an obligation to NATO and our European allies' need for that sweet crude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all governments act like that, actually. And the reason the U.S. Gets so much stick is due to the staggering scale they operate.

Also, Syria actually has massive value. Take away Syria and you have taken away Iran's only military alliance. Which, when it comes down to it, is the reason we are forcing regime change in a country who's people largely don't want it (like we do all over the world).

Edited by ExpandMyMind
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all governments act like that, actually. And the reason the U.S. Gets so much stick is due to the staggering scale they operate.

Also, Syria actually has massive value. Take away Syria and you have taken away Iran's only military alliance. Which, when it comes down to it, is the reason we are forcing regime change in a country who's people largely don't want it (like we do all over the world).

Yes, you are correct about that aspect of Syria "having value". I was just thinking of the old saw about the US invading to reap the natural resources of a country (oil) and then subjugating it's people. But, yes, Syria being separated from Iran's orbit would be a great benefit (I think) for the US and Israel. Of course that might also be a wash or even detrimental depending on which group claims power there. One thing sure is that no matter who gains ascendency they will be no friend of the US or Israel. In fact they will be able to portray Uncle Sam as culpable for the suffering since we had "an obligation" to stop the slaughter and did not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.