US Rep Alan Grayson via Big Ed radio..."at a minimum, a Billion dollars"

Who thinks there won't be retaliation?

What happens the day after the strike?

No one who advocates striking Syria can predict the outcome.

The law of unintended consequences at play.

What moral authority - the USA is broke, we owe every country...

5 replies, 929 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

5 replies	Author	Time	Post
US Rep Alan Grayson via Big Ed radio..."at a minimum, a Billion dollars" (Original post)	Ninga	Sep 2013	OP
There goes that bias toward rational thought, again.	gordianot	Sep 2013	#1
All that works in reverse.	Donald Ian Rankin	Sep 2013	#2
Yes but, I put a high percentage on Assad retaliating. We have bases within arms reach of Syria.	Ninga	Sep 2013	#3
Do something about the refugees	Turbineguy	Sep 2013	#4
Grayson said as much. Also he said humanitarian aid via Turkey where refugees are fleeing. Yes, we	Ninga	Sep 2013	#5

Response to Ninga (Original post)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 12:36 PM

gordianot (14,656 posts)

1. There goes that bias toward rational thought, again.

I do hope this is brought up when there is a Congressional debate but doubt anyone will listen. After all Alan is a "liberal" and everything has to be political.

Reply to this post

Response to Ninga (Original post)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 12:43 PM

Donald Ian Rankin (13,598 posts)

2. All that works in reverse.

Yes, it's quite true that attacking Syria may have unintended negative consequences.

But it's also entirely possible that a) weakening the military power of a repressive dictatorship in a volatile region will have unforseen positive knock-on effects, and b) that not intervening while Syria remains a war zone will have unforseen negative effects.

Remember, the choice in Syria is *not* between peace and war, it's between war without US and involvement and war with US involvement. And it's not obvious which the least worst option is.

Reply to this post

Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #2)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 01:00 PM

Ninga (7,501 posts)

3. Yes but, I put a high percentage on Assad retaliating. We have bases within arms reach of Syria.

The ripple affect is unknown and looms large.

Reply to this post

Response to Ninga (Original post)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 01:35 PM

Turbineguy (31,898 posts)

4. Do something about the refugees

go to the Banks where Assad has his money (reputedly $1.5 Billion), impound it to help with the refugees. There are lots of alternatives I'm sure.

Yes, we should do something for sure.

Stop coddling the assholes and punishing the ordinary people.

Reply to this post

Response to Turbineguy (Reply #4)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 01:59 PM

Ninga (7,501 posts)

5. Grayson said as much. Also he said humanitarian aid via Turkey where refugees are fleeing. Yes, we

can and should so SOMETHING other than bombing. I am in agreement.

Reply to this post

General Discussion (Forum)