OUR tax dollars at work......
 

This is one of those deals . . Obama hasn't helped it any, but I don't know the answer to the Syrian Puzzle, and I'm not sure anybody else does either.

You've got a Civil War between two, perhaps more, Islamic Factions, and they indiscriminately kill each other (Even when they're not having a war with each other) and the Christians are just targets for any of the Islamic factions.

In Syria, it's the "Alawites" who are in power, and I think that they're a branch of the Sunni Moslems, but they, before the civil war against Assad, protected the Christians from the Sunni Factions and the less moderate Sunnis . .

Giving arms to any of them is a crapshoot because all you have to do is look at Libya, where we armed the "Rebels" and they have turned against the West and are opting for an Islamic Theocracy anyway.

Plus . . The more radical Islamic rebels turned out to be al Quaeda in disguise and have made off with hundreds if not thousands of Ghaddifi's cache of SA-7 shoulder fired ground to air heat seeking missiles . . Look for a few commercial airliners to be shot down around the world . .

I'm probably wrong here, but I still think that we ought to build fences around those countries and just keep setting ammunition at the gates until nobody comes for it . .

I have no answers either. but let them kill off each other .

I echo Outlaw's statement. I'll also add, "not one drop of American blood should be spilled in, around, or over Syria". No matter what we do, or don't do, an Islamist victory will result in Syria.

BUT . . . Biiiiggg BUT here . . When you have a country (or in the current case, Countries) that are taken over by Radicals with lawless agendas or no effective government (Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Chad, etc) you have places that breed terrorists and outlaws (With all due respect, Outlaw) that will create problems for all of the civilized world.

And those things generally come home to roost in the form of things like 9/11, and lots of smaller, more frequent attacks all over the globe, usually targeted at one or another country's interests.

Problem is, or rather, the debate is, do you interfere and if so, with who . . ? You can keep the status quo and support the dictator, or you can gamble and support one or more groups of rebels or freedom Fighters, possibly, ending up out of the frying pan and into the fire as Libya and Egypt has just shown us.

In the case of both Libya, and now Syria, if we give the "Rebels" arms and technology, in six or eight months, we may find ourselves the targets of the guns we just gave them . .

D@mned if you do, and d@mned if you don't . .

In any case, expect O'Bozo to open a waffle house . . He's gonna try like hell to do absolutely nothing . . Just keep it in limbo . .

WELL MY ANSWER IS TO RADICAL AND WOULD BE THE TALK OF THE WORLD,IF ANY WAS LEFT.BECAUSE WE COULD JUST DROP A FEW BOMBS AND BE DONE WITH ALL OF IT...

Heh, heh . . It would depend upon what you wanted to be referred to in history as after you accomplished that . .

The Nazis killed millions in their gas chambers in WWII and were labeled as monsters. On the other hand, the Allies killed hundreds of thousands of civilians by "Collateral Damage" created by carpet bombing and two Atom Bombs and took the name of "Liberators" . .

As for the Islamists who are fighting for Jihad, to get them all with bombs (or even targeted by drone) the collateral damage would be over 90% . . And even if that were acceptable, there's so many of them in Europe and in Arabic Ghettos in this country, all you'd end up doing is alienating the remainder and still have the terrorist problem.

While it might sound "Racist' perhaps, I think it would be best if they killed each other off . . UPS can deliver ammunition cheaper than our military can deliver bombs . .

don't sound racist ,it sounds like a solution!!