It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Peacetime
These generals know that Syria has modern and conventional weaponry whereas Iraq and Afghanistan do not.
It would be a totally different type of war that soldiers would have to be re-trained to fight. Fighting counter-insurgents is like live training. Fighting someone like Syria would be the real deal.
Originally posted by Liquesence
reply to post by Wonderer2012
I'm really not sure whether Congress will vote no or not. I have already contacted my reps and senators (who are all Republican) that I want them to vote no, but I imagine they will vote yes. I know Chambliss seems to be pretty gung-ho about it, because that's how he is.
Regardless, if Congress does not authorize military "intervention" I believe that this administration will go ahead anyway, this based in part on seeing Kerry on ABC's This Week today (Sunday, Sept 1).
Whether the administration has to manufacture more evidence, lie, or create some other type of incident in the region to justify their rabid eagerness to go is a different story.
They'll bomb Syria, in some form. It's just a matter of when. :/
I'm ashamed of my country.
And, there is no logical reason for Assad to have used the chemical weapons. He has NOTHING to gain by using them and EVERYTHING to loose, so why would he? I highly doubt he would.