Syria Inaction is NOT AN OPTION

[Savannahmann]

13. Ok, so we bomb Assad.

Now groups affiliated with AQ have the Chemical Weapons since you can't bomb them to destroy them. Intelligent action may be what is called for, but so far nothing I've heard comes close to that. Even your reactionary rant does little to address the question of what's next?

President Obama has already ruled out a regime change. That means the lunatic who supposedly used Chemical Weapons is free to use them again. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/27/us-syria-crisis-obama-intelligence-idUSBRE97Q0S820130827

Destroying the Chemical Weapons with bombs is not advisable under any circumstances. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130830/DA8G7HS00.html

If you doubt me you can ask Veterans of the 37th Engineers. http://articles.philly.com/1996-11-10/news/25650277_1_khamisiyah-chemical-weapons-gulf-war-syndrome

But that aside, what do we do about Russia and China? http://news.yahoo.com/russia-sending-warships-mediterranean-report-082257880.html

Do we proceed under the assumption that they wouldn't be crazy enough to back up their threats with action? The very assumption that they are making towards us right now? Tell me how we respond when the Russian Navy sails into our formation of ships firing missiles and lights us up with targeting radar? Just pretend they aren't there and keep on teaching Assad a lesson?

What about Iran? They've threatened to fire on Israel. Do we wish the Israeli people good luck and then go ahead and teach Assad a lesson? We won't be able to fight Iran, Russia, China, and Syria. We don't have a tenth of the forces we would need to do that.

What about after? Let's say for the sake of this question, that nobody does anything after we fire our missiles at Syria. Assad still has the weapons. We've blown up a few "strategically important" useless buildings. He drops more chemical weapons in his civil war, and then what do we do? Do we launch a full scale assault with the Marines? Do we drop the Airborne in and fight a large scale conventional war? If Russia ignored our missiles, or even just protested, do we think they will ignore an invasion?

These are questions that must be answered before we light the fuse on one single missile. The irrational desire to teach Assad a lesson by bombing the crap out of useless buildings is an emotional response. But we need an intelligent response, which seems to be lacking from your tirade. Might I suggest you consider these questions for a moment? Because we are liable to lose tens of thousands of troops if the Russians object with force. Please don't pretend we can go through this without getting our hair mussed.

It could conceivably even lead to full scale nuclear war. Russia or China decides that we need to be taught a lesson for violating International Law. Or they propose a resolution at the UN calling on member states to attack the United States? Do we veto that or pray that the British do?

This has the potential of being the most dangerous time in our history since the Cuban Missile Crisis. Think for a moment, and see how your suggestion could lead us to a path of extreme danger for the world, not just Syria, or the United States.