Quantcast

Comments about ‘Richard Davis: Obama is right to move deliberately against Syria’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 28 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Iron Rod
Salt Lake City, UT

How many of you are aware that Syria and Iran have a self defense treaty requiring each to come to the others assistance if attacked?

How come the news media is not speculating what will happen if Iran enters the fray on the side of Syria if Syria is attacked by outside forces?

Will Iran attack Israel or US facilities in the Middle East?

Does Iran have a capability to cut the flow of oil thru the staits of hormuth?

If they do cut the flow how will that impact the world's economy?

Although we only receive 10" of our foreign oil from the middle east during the last embargo we shipped our own oil from Canada, Mexico, Venezula and domestic oil to Europe to make up for their short fall. How will that impact the price we pay here at the pump?

Do you still support a military attack on Syria and the consequences?

cjb
Bountiful, UT

President Obama had no business declaring a red line if the Syrians used chemical weapons. This because he has no authority to attack Syria under these circumstances. If He wanted a red line drawn he should have consulted with Congress and got a provisional declaration of war in the event that such and occurrence happened.

Too often presidents have gotten us into ill conceived wars but there is wisdom in numbers. To prevent this from happening Congress passed the War Powers Act. This has not been effective. Congress should now pass a law that if a has not declared that no soldier can be prosecuted for refusing to go, and if the ever draft is ever brought back that no drafte can be prosecuted for refusing to go.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Do Democrats realize its Al Qaeda that is fighting yet another dictator in Syria for gassing his own people and now Obama and the Democrats want to help Al Qaeda? Do Democrats remember 9/11, Benghazi and many other attacks on America perpetrated by Al Qaeda? Do Democrats remember their outrage when President Bush stopped another dictator for gassing his own people (Kurds)? No wonder the rest of the world laughs at us and has no respect for America!

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

The world laughs at us for the Iraq fiasco. This will restore lost credibility.

Shimlau
SAINT GEORGE, UT

I hope all of the writers to this forum that pounce on the 'unfunded war' band wagon, are ready to jump on this same bandwagon, and this same president for the same thing, can you say; Iraq, Pakistan, Viet Nam?

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@ One vote; Al Qaeda is laughing the loudest! Obama and the Democrats think our enemy is now our friend? Talk about lost credibility!

CHS 85
Sandy, UT

@Shimlau

I'll take your challenge. I'm ready to jump on the bandwagon to decry this upcoming military action. As much as I hate to see human suffering anywhere in the world, I don't think it is necessarily the United States' problem to solve.

Having actually served in Iraq and not seeing much improvement based on the amount of sacrifice (money, lives lost, lives damaged, etc.), I see the same thing happening here. We may see a temporary quell of the fighting, but as we have learned (maybe we haven't learned), the people in the Middle East are VERY patient and will wait years, decades, centuries to settle old scores.

Steve C. Warren
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

"Any president who takes lightly the responsibility of deploying troops to combat, like President Bush and unlike President Obama, is not fit for the office."

Amen.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

@Mountanman

7:12 a.m. Aug. 28, 2013
=======

Yes, and I'm against Obama military actions in Syria FOR THAT very reason!

BTW - Where were you been hiding for the past 12 years?
Don't tell me you've changed your stance -- that's called being a hypocrite.

The Solution
Las Cruces, NM

I agree with some of statements of this author. Syria is a very difficult situation. However, in the beginning of the conflict it was not so difficult. Had Obama acted quickly in the beginning, the US could have helped several of the innocent people who have suffered in this conflict. The Syrian citizens that were/are being abused deserved our help in the initial uprising. This help could have come by way of supplies: money, food, munitions. I do not think it would have been wise to be there physically.

However, since we did nothing, now terrorists organizations are involved and we are in a lose lose situation. At this point in time, it is better to stay out of the conflict, but support the 100s of 1000s of refugees that are stuck in neighboring countries in makeshift camps. We should spend money and seek donations from other countries to establish a safe haven for those refugees (the victims).

Skipray
Portsmouth, VA

The military war machine is incredibly effective at keeping us in a constant state of war for their own benefit and soldiers blindly march on to the propaganda thinking they are saving the day. The country has been duped and continues to be duped. Don't believe the lies.

Remery
El Centro, CA

So the Emperor will kill even more innocent women, children and non-combatants to make a point, not judgement which is the domain of GOD. Missile guidance systems fail and if your neighbor is the target, you are going to the Promise Land also. The Emperors of Rome believed themselves Gods, but faced judgment by the one and only God.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

Any conflict would be attacks from ships and aircraft, there won't be US ground troops. It'd be an attack similar to what the US and its European allies used with Libya.

While I'm on that matter... isn't it funny how conservatives attacked Obama when it came to Libya for "leading from behind" and letting Europe take the lead on that one, but now that it's Syria and he's more at the front of things they're mad at him again? Heaven forbid there ever be any consistency.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The Bush war had nothing to do with WMDs. Had the American public known before that the real purpose was commercial business for the control of the worlds oil we may not have let it happen.

Please tell us the truth about what are the United States interests in Syria that may mean death to thousands of Americans and people of Syria. And possibly start WWIII in a hot mode.

USAlover
Salt Lake City, UT

Imagine how peaceful this planet would be without Islamic nations?

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

Here is my guess - Barack will lob a few cruise missiles in to Syria and that will be it. Just a symbolic response which in effect will just further prove to the bad guys that the US is a patsy and they can use chemical weapons at will...which they will most certainly do. Barack just wants to check the box that states he actually did act ...he did something ... even though it did more hard than good. It was the same thing Clinton did back in the 90's when he lobed a few cruise missiles into some empty tents as a response to the USS Cole. As we all know the bad guys ..a couple years later...carried out 911. The symbolic use of force is useless but it is predictable from patsy liberals who care more about what their voting base will think rather than the actual real outcome and results of the use of force. The lesson here is - better to do NOTHING rather than tease them with some meaningless missile strike. What also might happen is Israel might get attacked if we do some symbolic strike which is MUCH worse now.

Lowonoil
Clearfield, UT

When I saw the link "Obama is Right" I had to look up to the top of the screen to see if I was still on the Deseret News Page.

friend82
baku, 00

we have an expression in our language, it says : "if you want to do some foolish job, don's waste time to seek ridiculous excuses, just do it" this is what West always do in Middle East. WMDs, Chemical weapons, democracy, human rights,.....
West just wants to protect it's Oil resources and security of its naughty boy, Israel. everything else is just funny jokes. Syrian rebels and Governments have killed 120,000 of each other and innocent people for more than 2.5 years. many village have been massacred from two sides..... Al-Qaeda is on the side of rebels. Extremists have executed many Christians and destroyed many church in Syria. why now West notice it?
I tell you why. they just waited until one of the Israel's neighbors completely devastated so it can't stand on its foot for following 30 years and now they feel responsible for human rights.
moreover, I am completely sure that Assad didn't perform gas attack, just someone else did it, maybe who was behind 11Sep events. dirty world

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@patriot

"Here is my guess - Barack will lob a few cruise missiles in to Syria and that will be it. "

I wish other conservatives thought like you on this (heh, even if it comes with the rant that made up the rest of your comment)... half the comments here seem to think we're getting into a multi-year ground war despite there being nobody (other than McCain who never met a potential conflict he didn't want to send wave after wave of troops at) who is talking about sending in ground troops.

stuff
Provo, UT

So, it's ok to kill over 100,000 people with bombs and bullets but once a few hundred are killed by gas, the line has been crossed? Killing is killing. Period.

The U.S. has no business being involved in Syria's civil war. Any action on the part of the U.S. would be an act of war, which would require approval by Congress. I haven't heard that congress has taken any action on approving or disapproving our involvement in this war. It's just plain wrong to get involved regardless of which side would benefit. Sadly, in this case, the U.S. would be assisting and provoking an enemy that would turn on us and other Middle Eastern countries, namely, Israel. It's just a potential horrible escalation of death and destruction beyond what it currently is. Just say 'No' to getting involved in Syria.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments