# Russians threathen US jets in Syria, here we go.



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

Russians will treat US fighter jets as targets. After the US shot down a Syrian fighter yesterday.

Another step towards WW3??

US responds to Russian threat after shoot-down of Syrian jet | Fox News


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

We have no business in Syria in the first place.
It is a losing proposition, and none of our damn business.
We should not be the world's policeman.


----------



## NKAWTG (Feb 14, 2017)

Nothing much will come of it.
The Russians know they can't win in that arena.


----------



## Salt-N-Pepper (Aug 18, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> We have no business in Syria in the first place.
> It is a losing proposition, and none of our damn business.
> We should not be the world's policeman.


We have no damned business being MOST of the places we are. Muzzies fighting muzzies is NOT our problem.


----------



## dwight55 (Nov 9, 2012)

Salt-N-Pepper said:


> ............ Muzzies fighting muzzies is NOT our problem.


How about if we arm both sides, . . . sell popcorn, . . . and sit back and watch the show??

Personally, I'm all for it.

I don't personally have any use whatsoever for muzzies any way you can present them. They are stupid, ignorant, moronic, . . . and some other adjectives.

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## tango (Apr 12, 2013)

I am sure that Russia was warned about this.
They have to bluster and brag about what they will do.
Bottom line is-- they will do nothing.


----------



## Illini Warrior (Jan 24, 2015)

the Syrians tried a BS play bombing close to the US positions and got smoked for it - the Russians know it - nothing but a repeat of the Tomahawk bitch slapping the US gave Syria .... 

the Iranian launching of mid-range missiles had more significance - that was a direct threat to the US ....


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Chipper said:


> Russians will treat US fighter jets as targets. After the US shot down a Syrian fighter yesterday.
> 
> Another step towards WW3??
> 
> US responds to Russian threat after shoot-down of Syrian jet | Fox News


 What the heck have we got to lose. this darn country so screwed up it aint going to right it's self nor does it want to.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

Last time we just pulled out and let the mooselims have their way we got isis. Has to stop someplace. Unless we want to be like the UK and Europe and fight it out in the streets.


----------



## NKAWTG (Feb 14, 2017)

Illini Warrior said:


> the Syrians tried a BS play bombing close to the US positions and got smoked for it - the Russians know it - nothing but a repeat of the Tomahawk bitch slapping the US gave Syria ....
> 
> the Iranian launching of mid-range missiles had more significance - that was a direct threat to the US ....


Yes, well sort of. All but one rocket missed its intended target.
So as threats go, they are potentially threatening.


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> We have no business in Syria in the first place.
> It is a losing proposition, and none of our damn business.
> We should not be the world's policeman.


Agreed but,,, it's the last ISIS major stronghold. No American troops close to the fighting but I'll support some planes and advisors over there.

Taking ISIS's "capital" won't totally destroy ISIS but it will seriously weaken them.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

John Galt said:


> Agreed but,,, it's the last ISIS major stronghold. No American troops close to the fighting but I'll support some planes and advisors over there.
> 
> Taking ISIS's "capital" won't totally destroy ISIS but it will seriously weaken them.


Oh, really? How about if I take up a collection and buy you a plane ticket?
Or does your support only extend to SOMEONE ELSE doing the dirty work?

And now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to bed.


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Oh, really? How about if I take up a collection and buy you a plane ticket?
> Or does your support only extend to SOMEONE ELSE doing the dirty work?
> 
> And now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to bed.


Damn, quite the response. I don't believe we should be the world's policeman but when it comes to ISIS and their attacks here in the US see giving logistical support to local troops, information, and air support as a good thing. I just don't want to see US soldiers patrolling the streets in a hostile country, that makes us the "policeman".

But I will take you up on that plane ticket, I've always wanted to fly to Hawaii.


----------



## SanAntonioPrepper (Apr 10, 2017)

John Galt said:


> Damn, quite the response. I don't believe we should be the world's policeman but when it comes to ISIS and their attacks here in the US see giving logistical support to local troops, information, and air support as a good thing. I just don't want to see US soldiers patrolling the streets in a hostile country, that makes us the "policeman".
> 
> But I will take you up on that plane ticket, I've always wanted to fly to Hawaii.


John, I agree with you to a point. For me though, I believe we should be the moral policeman of the World. I know there are many who disagree with me but I also know there are many who agree with me. Let me explain why I think we need to step in when dictators and brutalizing, terrorizing, torturing, starving, imprisoning and killing their own people.

The biggest reason: If we do not, who will?

I personally believe that each of us human beings has a responsibility to step in and protect the weak and innocent. Look at this world and the atrocities that are taking place now and have taken place in the past. One of my favorite quotes of all time is "evil prevails when good men fail to act".

Does this mean the US is "good" and everyone else is "bad"? No, of course not. Those are too "black and white of terms" and we, as a country are guilty too of doing things wrong at times. However, while it varies to some degree from region to region, there are pretty black and white terms of what is acceptable and ethical among us human beings as a whole. When those lines are crossed repeatedly over a significant period of time, with that particular person, group or country refusing ever to reverse course, yes, positive intervention should happen, good men or not. The US, just like every other established country is guilty of doing some things wrong but that does not mean that we should always turn a blind eye and not intervene on atrocities we know are occurring.

Should we step in and stop a brutal dictator of North Korea (NK) before he has the capability to do insane damage to us and the rest of the world? Should we step in so we can free his people? Yes, I believe we should. Each of us humans (and us collectively as a state or country) have a moral responsibility to humankind to do what we can to stop atrocities. To use appropriate but escalating force (if called for and threat continues) until the threat to innocent people is neutralized.

I saw this video and started another thread on this forum about a little girl, who is a North Korean defector and her heartbreaking story. This little girl's story is not totally unique as, while it is her own, experiences like these are very common in NK. Here is her story. Please watch. Her testimony is only about 7 minutes long:






Look at that little girls story and the guy we just got back, what he was taken captive for and how he was treated. One doesn't have to dig far into a Google search to see how brutal the NK government is to their own people.

Some questions we the World, we the US and we as individual human beings need to ask ourselves:

1. Looking back, should the world have done more to take out Hitler, knowing now the type of person he was?
2. Is the leader of North Korea (NK) like Hitler?
3. Does the NK leader have a "God complex"?
4. Is someone with a "God complex" and nuclear weapons a danger to the world?
5. Would it be ok to continue to turn a blind eye to this and to people like Kim (and Hitler in the past) and continue to say "its not our fight", "its sad but we have our own problems" and "lets worry about our own and our country first and let the North Koreans worry about North Korea"?
6. Should we just have let the Jews worry about Hitler as we all worry about our own personal countries?
7. Should the world pre-emptively take the initiative and do something about the leadership of North Korea because of the threat the leader poses not just to South Korea, Japan and the world but to its own people?


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

SanAntonioPrepper said:


> John, I agree with you to a point. For me though, I believe we should be the moral policeman of the World. I know there are many who disagree with me but I also know there are many who agree with me. Let me explain why I think we need to step in when dictators and brutalizing, terrorizing, torturing, starving, imprisoning and killing their own people.
> 
> The biggest reason: If we do not, who will?
> 
> ...


In 1950, we protected the innocent civilians of South Korea against a North Korean dictator. Cost to America?
36,574 Killed In Action; 103,284 Wounded In Action; 7,926 Missing In Action; 4,714 Prisoner Of War.
What did we gain for so much misery to our troops? There still is a crackpot dictator ruling North Korea.

In 1959 we began to help the Republic of Vietnam defend against communist aggression by a dictator to the north. Cost to America?
58,313 KIA; 153,303 WIA; 1,611 MIA; 778 POW.
What did we gain for all that suffering?

We intervened in Iraq in 2003 in an attempt to remove a brutal dictator.
You can look up the cost to America, a cost that continues to this very day.
What did we gain for all that suffering.

And then there's Afganistan........................................

When you have participated in American foreign policy gone wrong, when 514 men of your unit have their names engraved on the Vietnam Memorial in Washington, you just may have a different view of foreign adventures that old men safe in government concoct.
I do.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

I'll go a little farther, we do not act as the world's policeman. The blood of our service members are spilled for the benefit of central banking and major corporations. We, The People, are simply told whatever it takes to get us waving flags and calling for blood.

Think about it. The government is a bit picky about who is worthy of saving, don't you think? It all depends on whether the leader, whether he be elected or he be a dictator, stands in the way of special interests of entities other than the nation.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

How about this theory for those who are unable to understand what RPD and Denton are saying:

We have a mess in our own backyard that needs cleaned up before we go playing Better Homes and Gardens in someone else's neighborhood.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

We don't need to be in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Korea for that matter. The middle east can kill each other and go to hell for all I care. I am no dove, peace sign carrying, everything is beautiful hippy, but the only reason our people are dying in the middle east now is because of what's underneath all that worthless sand. 

Stop nation building, stop pouring money into countries that hate us, close the freaken borders to anyone from that god forsaken sand lot in the middle east and let the bastards blow each other to hell over there. 

SK said no to more missile defense systems that we are picking up the tab for. Fine, pull our troops out and let SK deal with the crazy fat kid in the north. ( Truth be told, I believe the US will have to deal with him sooner or later. ) Europe as well. WWII was 70 years ago. 

Anyone has the stones to shoot at us, then we kick ass and take names. Until then bring our troops and our money home, we have more then enough to deal with here on our own soil.

Of course, none of this will ever come to pass. Mankind has been at war with him self since the beginning of time and I don't believe for a second we have evolved beyond our nature to kill one another. 

Isolationism, like it or not, is no longer an option. So, being that the cards have been dealt, I am going to prepare for one, or all, of the above situations to go sideways and crazy.


----------



## Illini Warrior (Jan 24, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> In 1950, we protected the innocent civilians of South Korea against a North Korean dictator. Cost to America?
> 36,574 Killed In Action; 103,284 Wounded In Action; 7,926 Missing In Action; 4,714 Prisoner Of War.
> What did we gain for so much misery to our troops? There still is a crackpot dictator ruling North Korea.
> 
> ...


why does your list start in the 1950s and not 1812? - according to you there's never a good reason or cause to use military force ....


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Illini Warrior said:


> why does your list start in the 1950s and not 1812? - according to you there's never a good reason or cause to use military force ....


Because it was 11:00 PM and time to go to bed when I wrote that.

The American Revolution had to be fought. In fact my great-great-great-great grandfather was an infantry private in the Continental Army.
The war of 1812 was Britain's attempt to retake the Colonies, that was a defensive fight for us.

Beyond that, about the only just war I can think of off hand was World War Two.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

Unfortunately, there is truth in this.


----------

