TexasCHLforum.com

Purplehood wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

Purplehood wrote:Really? The Syrians wouldn't be expecting us to destroy their Air Force over Chemical Weapons?

I repeat, there are absolutely no attainable or quantifiable goals that our military can accomplish that is worthwhile that do not fall-short of the requirement for complete boots-on-the-ground intervention such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. So by default, anything we do short of that is a waste of time and resources.

Well we could respond with nuking the artillery position that launched the site, and suspected Assad heaquarters, with a notation that US policy is that WMDs begets WMDs.

Short of that though, you're correct.

We did that with Hussein and he never backed-down. Been there, done that.

IMHO, we should only intervene in Syria with the Israeli Army leading the assault elements.

Purplehood wrote:Really? The Syrians wouldn't be expecting us to destroy their Air Force over Chemical Weapons?

I repeat, there are absolutely no attainable or quantifiable goals that our military can accomplish that is worthwhile that do not fall-short of the requirement for complete boots-on-the-ground intervention such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. So by default, anything we do short of that is a waste of time and resources.