Straight up or down: Do you support U.S. strikes against Assad's forces in Syria?

[cali]

119 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	11 (9%)
	No
	108 (91%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[quinnox]

1. No, but with the caveat that

if it is some cruise missiles fired long range, and a one time deal, like a "lesson" to show that this was unacceptable to use the chemical weapons, at least that would be better then continuous strikes over days or weeks and getting heavily involved.

Definitely it should not be something that leads to further escalation and use of military force. I guess if it was a one time deal, even though I still think it is the wrong thing to do, I could accept it if that was it.

[joshcryer]

45. Don't get your hopes up.

There are at least 5 chemical weapons factories in Syria, and they can't be taken out in one strike, it'd be strikes over a period of days, if not weeks.

[kestrel91316]

2. Nope. A pox on the whole lot of them.

[Wait Wut]

3. Both.

My compassion is a gray area. I can see the outcomes of both solutions and neither is good for the Syrian people. If I were to be only concerned with the US, I'd vote no. If I want to stop Assad's murderous rampage against his own people, yes.

As I said yesterday, I'm glad I'm not the President.

[cali]

4. Ack. There is the very real probability that strikes will make things worse

for the people of Syria not better.

[Wait Wut]

13. Exactly.

There is no black and white here. They're in trouble either way. The question is, which is worse trouble? I see an endless attack from Assad and no solution in sight. With outside involvement, it 'could' bring an end to Assad, but he's just one problem.

I just don't know.

[jeff47]

19. No repercussions for chemical weapons will surely improve the Syrian's lot

Why, Assad would never use them on a larger scale if the only result is a stern talking to.

[cali]

35. yeah, Syria exists in a vacuum. Not.

Look, 100,000 people have died in this awful civil war. Another 100,000 could have died and it's unlikely the U.S. would have intervened militarily.

There is a strong possibility that our military intervention will make things worse- and not only for the Syrian people.

[sabrina 1]

83. The British PM just now was forced to acknowledge that that evidence of

the Syrian Government being responsible for the chemical attacks 'is CIRCUMSTANTIAL'. Iow, he watched videos on UTube.

So, where is this evidence that the US claims to have but apparently haven't shared with the UK?

Syrian Kurds are now under attack by these so-called 'rebels' who are Al Queda hoping to take over the Kurdish land in Syria AND Iraq.

This is insand, we are told we are fighting a WOT against Al Queda, now we are planning to go in and help Al Queda.

[jeff47]

96. No. You have to actually read the reports

They say what they actually say, not what you want them to say.

The British PM was forced to acknowledge that we don't know if Assad ordered the attack. As in personally issued the order.

The Syrian government carried out the attack. Doubt about Assad's personal orders doesn't change that.

The difference would be important if we were talking about a trial at the Hague, but we're talking about a strike against the Syrian government. It doesn't matter which entity within that government ordered the chemical weapon attack.

This is insand, we are told we are fighting a WOT against Al Queda, now we are planning to go in and help Al Queda.

Doing nothing will show the Syrian government they have nothing to fear from using chemical weapons. So they will use them to put down the rebellion.

The point of the strike is not to eliminate the Syrian government. It's to show them that chemical attacks are not worth it, so that the WMD genie is put back in the bottle. Limited airstrikes are the least-bad option to accomplish that.

[ConcernedCanuk]

59. But cali - Iraq is so peaceful now!

.
.
.

AND Afghanistan! -

bombs work!

CC

ps: hope the sarcasm thing is not necessary

[cali]

60. You forgot Libya!

(no sarcasm thingy needed)

[lark]

84. How is killing Syrian civilians

good for their civilians? I feel for the Syrian people, but both sides are murdering bastards, both are extremists, so supporting either is crazy. We can't police the world and we certainly don't need to be creating even more terrorists in the mid-east. The only ones that would win from military action is the military-industrial complex.

[NYC_SKP]

5. Oh Hell No. I want to eliminate the Pentagon and CIA NSA DHS, worthless wastes of money.

I'm

Fucking

Done!

Less than 75 years ago, there was no Pentagon, no CIA, and no NSA.

And you know what? LIFE WAS FUCKING BETTER!.

The Constitution provides for THREE branches, not four, or five, yet the DOC, CIA, NSA, DHS, et al, run THE WHOLE FUCKING SHOW.

w.t.f?

[Progressive dog]

16. Life was better in the middle of the depression

with the second world war about to start?

[Warren Stupidity]

18. My entire life we have been in a state of war. My entire life. I'm 61 years old.

I'd like to give peace a chance. Your implication that without the permanent state of war we've been in since 1941 would we instead be standing on soup lines waiting for Hitler to invade is ridiculous.

[NYC_SKP]

22. Thank you.

My grandparents lived through the depression. At least they had their privacy intact and a brighter future as time went on.

[ConcernedCanuk]

57. yep - well said

.
.
.

" Your implication that without the permanent state of war we've been in since 1941 would we instead be standing on soup lines waiting for Hitler to invade is ridiculous."



CC

[Progressive dog]

65. I don't get what you are saying

I replied to someone who claimed that life was better 75 years ago. I don't think so, I like to eat and have a roof over my head. I like my family to eat, too. If you think that it is better to not ever fight, that's up to you. If you seriously believe we shouldn't have stood up to fascism even after we were attacked, that is your right. But for god's sake, don't pretend that we were better off starving.

[Warren Stupidity]

68. So your point is that without perpetual war we would be in permanent economic depression?

It is an interesting claim, one that does have some merit, but I suspect you don't actually want to make that claim, but instead you want to shift the debate to the absurd claim that we were better off in a depression, a claim made by nobody in this thread but you.

[HoneychildMooseMoss]

73. I'm pretty sure we weren't involved in any shooting conflicts under Carter

although Zbigniew Brzezinski helped to get us indirectly entangled in Afghanistan.

And except for that Mayaguez incident, I can't think of any hot conflict under Ford, either.

[Warren Stupidity]

78. I view our history a bit differently than some of you.

Two things:
1. We never really demobilized after World War Two neither economically or politically. We remained on a war footing with a huge standing conscription army until the end of the Vietnam war. We maintained, and continue to maintain occupation forces in Europe and Asia and we continue our aggressive naval force projection around the world. We have expanded, not demobilized that occupation to include over 1000 bases in what is now a planetary garrison. We have continued the political state of emergency from that era up to the present day, expanding it and its assorted emergency powers legislation repeatedly.

2. We have been in major and minor conflicts almost nonstop since 1941.

1950–53 – Korean War. The United States responded to North Korean invasion of South Korea by going to its assistance, pursuant to United Nations Security Council resolutions. US forces deployed in Korea exceeded 300,000 during the last year of the conflict. Over 36,600 US military were killed in action.[RL30172]
1950–55 – Formosa (Taiwan). In June 1950 at the beginning of the Korean War, President Truman ordered the U.S. Seventh Fleet to prevent Chinese Communist attacks upon Formosa and Chinese Nationalist operations against mainland China.[RL30172]
1954–55 – China. Naval units evacuated U.S. civilians and military personnel from the Tachen Islands.[RL30172]
1955–64 – Vietnam. First military advisors sent to Vietnam on 12 Feb 1955. By 1964, US troop levels had grown to 21,000. On 7 August 1964, US Congress approved Gulf of Tonkin resolution affirming "All necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States. . .to prevent further aggression. . . (and) assist any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asian Collective Defense Treaty (SEATO) requesting assistance. . ."[Vietnam timeline]
1956 – Egypt. A marine battalion evacuated US nationals and other persons from Alexandria during the Suez crisis.[RL30172]
1958 – Lebanon. Lebanon crisis of 1958 Marines were landed in Lebanon at the invitation of President Camille Chamoun to help protect against threatened insurrection supported from the outside. The President's action was supported by a Congressional resolution passed in 1957 that authorized such actions in that area of the world.[RL30172]
1959–60 – The Caribbean. Second Marine Ground Task Force was deployed to protect U.S. nationals following the Cuban revolution.[RL30172]
1959–75 – Vietnam War. U.S. military advisers had been in South Vietnam for a decade, and their numbers had been increased as the military position of the Saigon government became weaker. After citing what he termed were attacks on U.S. destroyers in the Tonkin Gulf, President Johnson asked in August 1964 for a resolution expressing U.S. determination to support freedom and protect peace in Southeast Asia. Congress responded with the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, expressing support for "all necessary measures" the President might take to repel armed attacks against U.S. forces and prevent further aggression. Following this resolution, and following a communist attack on a U.S. installation in central Vietnam, the United States escalated its participation in the war to a peak of 543,000 military personnel by April 1969.[RL30172]
1960–1969[edit source | editbeta]
1962 – Thailand. The Third Marine Expeditionary Unit landed on May 17, 1962 to support that country during the threat of Communist pressure from outside; by July 30, the 5,000 marines had been withdrawn.[RL30172]
1962 – Cuba. Cuban Missile Crisis On October 22, President Kennedy instituted a "quarantine" on the shipment of offensive missiles to Cuba from the Soviet Union. He also warned Soviet Union that the launching of any missile from Cuba against nations in the Western Hemisphere would bring about U.S. nuclear retaliation on the Soviet Union. A negotiated settlement was achieved in a few days.[RL30172]
1962–75 – Laos. From October 1962 until 1975, the United States played an important role in military support of anti-Communist forces in Laos.[RL30172]
1964 – Congo (Zaire). The United States sent four transport planes to provide airlift for Congolese troops during a rebellion and to transport Belgian paratroopers to rescue foreigners.[RL30172]
1965 – Invasion of Dominican Republic. Operation Power Pack. The United States intervened to protect lives and property during a Dominican revolt and sent 20,000 U.S. troops as fears grew that the revolutionary forces were coming increasingly under Communist control.[RL30172] A popular rebellion breaks out, promising to reinstall Juan Bosch as the country's elected leader. The revolution is crushed when U.S. Marines land to uphold the military regime by force. The CIA directs everything behind the scenes.
1967 – Israel. The USS Liberty incident, whereupon a United States Navy Technical Research Ship was attacked June 8, 1967 by Israeli armed forces, killing 34 and wounding more than 170 U.S. crew members.
1967 – Congo (Zaire). The United States sent three military transport aircraft with crews to provide the Congo central government with logistical support during a revolt.[RL30172]
1968 – Laos & Cambodia. U.S. starts secret bombing campaign against targets along the Ho Chi Minh trail in the sovereign nations of Cambodia and Laos. The bombings last at least two years. (See Operation Commando Hunt)
1970–1979[edit source | editbeta]
1970 – Cambodian Campaign. U.S. troops were ordered into Cambodia to clean out Communist sanctuaries from which Viet Cong and North Vietnamese attacked U.S. and South Vietnamese forces in Vietnam. The object of this attack, which lasted from April 30 to June 30, was to ensure the continuing safe withdrawal of American forces from South Vietnam and to assist the program of Vietnamization.[RL30172]
1972 - North Vietnam - Christmas bombing Operation Linebacker II (not mentioned in RL30172, but an operation leading to peace negotiations). The operation was conducted from 18–29 December 1972. It was a bombing of the cities Hanoi and Haiphong by B-52 bombers.
1973 – Operation Nickel Grass, a strategic airlift operation conducted by the United States to deliver weapons and supplies to Israel during the Yom Kippur War.
1974 – Evacuation from Cyprus. United States naval forces evacuated U.S. civilians during the Turkish invasion of Cyprus.[RL30172]
1975 – Evacuation from Vietnam. Operation Frequent Wind. On April 3, 1975, President Ford reported U.S. naval vessels, helicopters, and Marines had been sent to assist in evacuation of refugees and US nationals from Vietnam.[RL30172]
1975 – Evacuation from Cambodia. Operation Eagle Pull. On April 12, 1975, President Ford reported that he had ordered U.S. military forces to proceed with the planned evacuation of U.S. citizens from Cambodia.[RL30172]
1975 – South Vietnam. On April 30, 1975, President Ford reported that a force of 70 evacuation helicopters and 865 Marines had evacuated about 1,400 U.S. citizens and 5,500 third country nationals and South Vietnamese from landing zones in and around the U.S. Embassy, Saigon and Tan Son Nhut Airport.[RL30172]
1975 – Cambodia. Mayagüez Incident. On May 15, 1975, President Ford reported he had ordered military forces to retake the SS Mayagüez, a merchant vessel which was seized from Cambodian naval patrol boats in international waters and forced to proceed to a nearby island.[RL30172]
1976 – Lebanon. On July 22 and 23, 1976, helicopters from five U.S. naval vessels evacuated approximately 250 Americans and Europeans from Lebanon during fighting between Lebanese factions after an overland convoy evacuation had been blocked by hostilities.[RL30172]
1976 – Korea. Additional forces were sent to Korea after two American soldiers were killed by North Korean soldiers in the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea while cutting down a tree.[RL30172]
1978 – Zaire (Congo). From May 19 through June 1978, the United States utilized military transport aircraft to provide logistical support to Belgian and French rescue operations in Zaire.[RL30172]
1980–1989[edit source | editbeta]
1980 – Iran. Operation Eagle Claw. On April 26, 1980, President Carter reported the use of six U.S. transport planes and eight helicopters in an unsuccessful attempt to rescue the American hostages in Iran.
1980 - U.S. Army and Air Force units arrive in the Sinai in September as part of "Operation Bright Star". They are there to train with Egyptians armed forces as part of the Camp David peace accords signed in 1979. Elements of the 101st Airborne Division, ( 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry) and Air Force MAC (Military Airlift Command) units are in theater for four months and are the first U.S. military forces in the region since World War II.
1981 – El Salvador. After a guerrilla offensive against the government of El Salvador, additional U.S. military advisers were sent to El Salvador, bringing the total to approximately 55, to assist in training government forces in counterinsurgency.[RL30172]
1981 – Libya. First Gulf of Sidra Incident On August 19, 1981, U.S. planes based on the carrier USS Nimitz shot down two Libyan jets over the Gulf of Sidra after one of the Libyan jets had fired a heat-seeking missile. The United States periodically held freedom of navigation exercises in the Gulf of Sidra, claimed by Libya as territorial waters but considered international waters by the United States.[RL30172]
1982 – Sinai. On March 19, 1982, President Reagan reported the deployment of military personnel and equipment to participate in the Multinational Force and Observers in the Sinai. Participation had been authorized by the Multinational Force and Observers Resolution, Public Law 97-132.[RL30172]
1982 – Lebanon. Multinational Force in Lebanon. On August 21, 1982, President Reagan reported the dispatch of 800 Marines to serve in the multinational force to assist in the withdrawal of members of the Palestine Liberation force from Beirut. The Marines left September 20, 1982.[RL30172]
1982–83 – Lebanon. On September 29, 1982, President Reagan reported the deployment of 1200 marines to serve in a temporary multinational force to facilitate the restoration of Lebanese government sovereignty. On September 29, 1983, Congress passed the Multinational Force in Lebanon Resolution (P.L. 98-119) authorizing the continued participation for eighteen months.[RL30172]
1983 – Egypt. After a Libyan plane bombed a city in Sudan on March 18, 1983, and Sudan and Egypt appealed for assistance, the United States dispatched an AWACS electronic surveillance plane to Egypt.[RL30172]
1983 – Grenada. Operation Urgent Fury. Citing the increased threat of Soviet and Cuban influence and noting the development of an international airport following a coup d'état and alignment with the Soviets and Cuba, the U.S. invades the island nation of Grenada.[RL30172]
1983–89 – Honduras. In July 1983, the United States undertook a series of exercises in Honduras that some believed might lead to conflict with Nicaragua. On March 25, 1986, unarmed U.S. military helicopters and crewmen ferried Honduran troops to the Nicaraguan border to repel Nicaraguan troops.[RL30172]
1983 – Chad. On August 8, 1983, President Reagan reported the deployment of two AWACS electronic surveillance planes and eight F-15 fighter planes and ground logistical support forces to assist Chad against Libyan and rebel forces.[RL30172]
1984 – Persian Gulf. On June 5, 1984, Saudi Arabian jet fighter planes, aided by intelligence from a U.S. AWACS electronic surveillance aircraft and fueled by a U.S. KC-10 tanker, shot down two Iranian fighter planes over an area of the Persian Gulf proclaimed as a protected zone for shipping.[RL30172]
1985 – Italy. On October 10, 1985, U.S. Navy pilots intercepted an Egyptian airliner and forced it to land in Sicily. The airliner was carrying the hijackers of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro who had killed an American citizen during the hijacking.[RL30172]
1986 – Libya. Action in the Gulf of Sidra (1986) On March 26, 1986, President Reagan reported on March 24 and 25, U.S. forces, while engaged in freedom of navigation exercises around the Gulf of Sidra, had been attacked by Libyan missiles and the United States had responded with missiles.[RL30172]
1986 – Libya. Operation El Dorado Canyon. On April 16, 1986, President Reagan reported that U.S. air and naval forces had conducted bombing strikes on terrorist facilities and military installations in the Libyan capitol of Tripoli, claiming that Libyan leader Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi was responsible for a bomb attack at a German disco that killed two U.S. soldiers.[RL30172]
1986 – Bolivia. U.S. Army personnel and aircraft assisted Bolivia in anti-drug operations.[RL30172]
1987 – Persian Gulf. USS Stark was struck on May 17 by two Exocet antiship missiles fired from an Iraqi F-1 Mirage during the Iran-Iraq War, killing 37 U.S. Navy sailors.
1987 – Persian Gulf. Operation Nimble Archer. Attacks on two Iranian oil platforms in the Persian Gulf by United States Navy forces on October 19. The attack was a response to Iran's October 16, 1987 attack on the MV Sea Isle City, a reflagged Kuwaiti oil tanker at anchor off Kuwait, with a Silkworm missile.
1987–88 – Persian Gulf. Operation Earnest Will - After the Iran-Iraq War (the Tanker War phase) resulted in several military incidents in the Persian Gulf, the United States increased U.S. joint military forces operations in the Persian Gulf and adopted a policy of reflagging and escorting Kuwaiti oil tankers through the Persian Gulf to protect them from Iraqi and Iranian attacks. President Reagan reported that U.S. ships had been fired upon or struck mines or taken other military action on September 21 (Iran Ajr), October 8, and October 19, 1987 and April 18 (Operation Praying Mantis), July 3, and July 14, 1988. The United States gradually reduced its forces after a cease-fire between Iran and Iraq on August 20, 1988.[RL30172] It was the largest naval convoy operation since World War II.[5]
1987–88 – Persian Gulf. Operation Prime Chance was a United States Special Operations Command operation intended to protect U.S.-flagged oil tankers from Iranian attack during the Iran-Iraq War. The operation took place roughly at the same time as Operation Earnest Will.
1988 – Persian Gulf. Operation Praying Mantis was the April 18, 1988 action waged by U.S. naval forces in retaliation for the Iranian mining of the Persian Gulf and the subsequent damage to an American warship.
1988 – Honduras. Operation Golden Pheasant was an emergency deployment of U.S. troops to Honduras in 1988, as a result of threatening actions by the forces of the (then socialist) Nicaraguans.
1988 – USS Vincennes shoot down of Iran Air Flight 655
1988 – Panama. In mid-March and April 1988, during a period of instability in Panama and as the United States increased pressure on Panamanian head of state General Manuel Noriega to resign, the United States sent 1,000 troops to Panama, to "further safeguard the canal, US lives, property and interests in the area." The forces supplemented 10,000 U.S. military personnel already in the Panama Canal Zone.[RL30172]
1989 – Libya. Second Gulf of Sidra Incident On January 4, 1989, two U.S. Navy F-14 aircraft based on the USS John F. Kennedy shot down two Libyan jet fighters over the Mediterranean Sea about 70 miles north of Libya. The U.S. pilots said the Libyan planes had demonstrated hostile intentions.[RL30172]
1989 – Panama. On May 11, 1989, in response to General Noriega's disregard of the results of the Panamanian election, President Bush ordered a brigade-sized force of approximately 1,900 troops to augment the estimated 1,000 U.S. forces already in the area.[RL30172]
1989 – Colombia, Bolivia, and Peru. Andean Initiative in War on Drugs. On September 15, 1989, President Bush announced that military and law enforcement assistance would be sent to help the Andean nations of Colombia, Bolivia, and Peru combat illicit drug producers and traffickers. By mid-September there were 50–100 U.S. military advisers in Colombia in connection with transport and training in the use of military equipment, plus seven Special Forces teams of 2–12 persons to train troops in the three countries.[RL30172]
1989 – Philippines. Operation Classic Resolve. On December 2, 1989, President Bush reported that on December 1, Air Force fighters from Clark Air Base in Luzon had assisted the Aquino government to repel a coup attempt. In addition, 100 marines were sent from U.S. Naval Base Subic Bay to protect the United States Embassy in Manila.[RL30172]
1989–90 – Panama. Operation Just Cause. On December 21, 1989, President Bush reported that he had ordered U.S. military forces to Panama to protect the lives of American citizens and bring General Noriega to justice. By February 13, 1990, all the invasion forces had been withdrawn.[RL30172] Around 200 Panamanian civilians were reported killed. The Panamanian head of state, General Manuel Noriega, was captured and brought to the U.S.
1990–1999[edit source | editbeta]
1990 – Liberia: On August 6, 1990, President Bush reported that a reinforced rifle company had been sent to provide additional security to the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia, and that helicopter teams had evacuated U.S. citizens from Liberia.[RL30172]
1990 – Saudi Arabia: On August 9, 1990, President Bush reported that he launched Operation Desert Shield by ordering the forward deployment of substantial elements of the U.S. armed forces into the Persian Gulf region to help defend Saudi Arabia after the August 2 invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. On November 16, 1990, he reported the continued buildup of the forces to ensure an adequate offensive military option.[RL30172]American hostages being held in Iran.[RL30172] Staging point for the troops was primarily Bagram air field.
1991 – Iraq and Kuwait. Operation Desert Storm: On January 16, 1991, in response to the refusal by Iraq to leave Kuwait, U.S. and Coalition aircraft attacked Iraqi forces and military targets in Iraq and Kuwait in conjunction with a coalition of allies and under United Nations Security Council resolutions. In February 24, 1991, U.S.-led United Nation (UN) forces launched a ground offensive that finally drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait within 100 hours. Combat operations ended on February 28, 1991, when President Bush declared a ceasefire.[RL30172]
1991–1996 – Iraq. Operation Provide Comfort: Delivery of humanitarian relief and military protection for Kurds fleeing their homes in northern Iraq during the 1991 uprising, by a small Allied ground force based in Turkey which began in April 1991.
1991 – Iraq: On May 17, 1991, President Bush stated that the Iraqi repression of the Kurdish people had necessitated a limited introduction of U.S. forces into northern Iraq for emergency relief purposes.[RL30172]
1991 – Zaire: On September 25–27, 1991, after widespread looting and rioting broke out in Kinshasa, Air Force C-141s transported 100 Belgian troops and equipment into Kinshasa. American planes also carried 300 French troops into the Central African Republic and hauled evacuated American citizens.[RL30172]
1992 – Sierra Leone. Operation Silver Anvil: Following the April 29 coup that overthrew President Joseph Saidu Momoh, a United States European Command (USEUCOM) Joint Special Operations Task Force evacuated 438 people (including 42 Third Country nationals) on May 3. Two Air Mobility Command (AMC) C-141s flew 136 people from Freetown, Sierra Leone, to the Rhein-Main Air Base in Germany and nine C-130 sorties carried another 302 people to Dakar, Senegal.[RL30172]
1992–1996 – Bosnia and Herzegovina: Operation Provide Promise was a humanitarian relief operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Yugoslav Wars, from July 2, 1992, to January 9, 1996, which made it the longest running humanitarian airlift in history.[6]
1992 – Kuwait: On August 3, 1992, the United States began a series of military exercises in Kuwait, following Iraqi refusal to recognize a new border drawn up by the United Nations and refusal to cooperate with UN inspection teams.[RL30172]
1992–2003 – Iraq. Iraqi no-fly zones: The U.S., United Kingdom, and its Gulf War allies declared and enforced "no-fly zones" over the majority of sovereign Iraqi airspace, prohibiting Iraqi flights in zones in southern Iraq and northern Iraq, and conducting aerial reconnaissance and bombings. Often, Iraqi forces continued throughout a decade by firing on U.S. and British aircraft patrolling no-fly zones.(See also Operation Northern Watch, Operation Southern Watch) [RL30172]
1992–1995 – Somalia. Operation Restore Hope. Somali Civil War: On December 10, 1992, President Bush reported that he had deployed U.S. armed forces to Somalia in response to a humanitarian crisis and a UN Security Council Resolution in support for UNITAF. The operation came to an end on May 4, 1993. U.S. forces continued to participate in the successor United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM II).(See also Battle of Mogadishu)[RL30172]
1993-1995 - Bosnia. Operation Deny Flight: On April 12, 1993, in response to a United Nations Security Council passage of Resolution 816, U.S. and NATO enforced the no-fly zone over the Bosnian airspace, prohibited all unauthorized flights and allowed to "take all necessary measures to ensure compliance with [the no-fly zone restrictions]."
1993 – Macedonia: On July 9, 1993, President Clinton reported the deployment of 350 U.S. soldiers to the Republic of Macedonia to participate in the UN Protection Force to help maintain stability in the area of former Yugoslavia.[RL30172]
1994: Bosnia. Banja Luka incident: NATO become involved in the first combat situation when NATO U.S. Air Force F-16 jets shot down four of the six Bosnian Serb J-21 Jastreb single-seat light attack jets for violating UN-mandated no-fly zone.
1994–1995 – Haiti. Operation Uphold Democracy: U.S. ships had begun embargo against Haiti. Up to 20,000 U.S. military troops were later deployed to Haiti to restore democratically-elected Haiti President Jean-Bertrand Aristide from a military regime which came into power in 1991 after a major coup.[RL30172]
1994 – Macedonia: On April 19, 1994, President Clinton reported that the U.S. contingent in Macedonia had been increased by a reinforced company of 200 personnel.[RL30172]
1995 – Bosnia. Operation Deliberate Force: In August 30, 1995, U.S. and NATO aircraft began a major bombing campaign of Bosnian Serb Army in response to a Bosnian Serb mortar attack on a Sarajevo market that killed 37 people in August 28, 1995. This operation lasted until September 20, 1995. The air campaign along with a combined allied ground force of Muslim and Croatian Army against Serb positions led to a Dayton agreement in December 1995 with the signing of warring factions of the war. As part of Operation Joint Endeavor, U.S. and NATO dispatched the Implementation Force (IFOR) peacekeepers to Bosnia to uphold the Dayton agreement.[RL30172]
1996 – Liberia. Operation Assured Response: On April 11, 1996, President Clinton reported that on April 9, 1996 due to the "deterioration of the security situation and the resulting threat to American citizens" in Liberia he had ordered U.S. military forces to evacuate from that country "private U.S. citizens and certain third-country nationals who had taken refuge in the U.S. Embassy compound...."[RL30172]
1996 – Central African Republic. Operation Quick Response: On May 23, 1996, President Clinton reported the deployment of U.S. military personnel to Bangui, Central African Republic, to conduct the evacuation from that country of "private U.S. citizens and certain U.S. government employees", and to provide "enhanced security for the American Embassy in Bangui."[RL30172] United States Marine Corps elements of Joint Task Force Assured Response, responding in nearby Liberia, provided security to the embassy and evacuated 448 people, including between 190 and 208 Americans. The last Marines left Bangui on June 22.
1996-Kuwait. Operation Desert Strike: American Air Strikes in the north to protect the Kurdish population against the Iraqi Army attacks. U.S. deploys 5,000 soldiers from the 1ST Cavalry Division at Ft Hood Texas in response to Iraqi attacks on the Kurdish people.[citation needed]
1996 - Bosnia. Operation Joint Guard: In December 21, 1996, U.S. and NATO established the SFOR peacekeepers to replace the IFOR in enforcing the peace under the Dayton agreement.
1997 – Albania. Operation Silver Wake: On March 13, 1997, U.S. military forces were used to evacuate certain U.S. government employees and private U.S. citizens from Tirana, Albania.[RL30172]
1997 – Congo and Gabon: On March 27, 1997, President Clinton reported on March 25, 1997, a standby evacuation force of U.S. military personnel had been deployed to Congo and Gabon to provide enhanced security and to be available for any necessary evacuation operation.[RL30172]
1997 – Sierra Leone: On May 29 and May 30, 1997, U.S. military personnel were deployed to Freetown, Sierra Leone, to prepare for and undertake the evacuation of certain U.S. government employees and private U.S. citizens.[RL30172]
1997 – Cambodia: On July 11, 1997, In an effort to ensure the security of American citizens in Cambodia during a period of domestic conflict there, a Task Force of about 550 U.S. military personnel were deployed at Utapao Air Base in Thailand for possible evacuations. [RL30172]
1998 – Iraq. Operation Desert Fox: U.S. and British forces conduct a major four-day bombing campaign from December 16–19, 1998 on Iraqi targets.[RL30172]
1998 – Guinea-Bissau. Operation Shepherd Venture: On June 10, 1998, in response to an army mutiny in Guinea-Bissau endangering the U.S. Embassy, President Clinton deployed a standby evacuation force of U.S. military personnel to Dakar, Senegal, to evacuate from the city of Bissau.[RL30172]
1998–1999 – Kenya and Tanzania: U.S. military personnel were deployed to Nairobi, Kenya, to coordinate the medical and disaster assistance related to the bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.[RL30172]
1998 – Afghanistan and Sudan. Operation Infinite Reach: On August 20, President Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack against two suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and a suspected chemical factory in Sudan.[RL30172]
1998 – Liberia: On September 27, 1998, America deployed a stand-by response and evacuation force of 30 U.S. military personnel to increase the security force at the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia. [1] [RL30172]
1999–2001 - East Timor: Limited number of U.S. military forces deployed with the United Nations-mandated International Force for East Timor restore peace to East Timor.[RL30172]
1999 – Serbia. Operation Allied Force: U.S. and NATO aircraft began a major bombing of Serbia and Serb positions in Kosovo in March 24, 1999, during the Kosovo War due to the refusal by Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic to end repression against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. This operation ended in June 10, 1999, when Milosevic agreed to pull out his troops out of Kosovo. In response to the situation in Kosovo, NATO dispatched the KFOR peacekeepers to secure the peace under UNSC Resolution 1244.[RL30172]
2000–2009[edit source | editbeta]
2000 – Sierra Leone. On May 12, 2000 a U.S. Navy patrol craft deployed to Sierra Leone to support evacuation operations from that country if needed.[RL30172]
2000 - Nigeria. Special Forces troops are sent to Nigeria to lead a training mission in the county.[7]
2000 – Yemen. On October 12, 2000, after the USS Cole attack in the port of Aden, Yemen, military personnel were deployed to Aden.[RL30172]
2000 – East Timor. On February 25, 2000, a small number of U.S. military personnel were deployed to support the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET). [RL30172]
2001 – On April 1, 2001, a mid-air collision between a United States Navy EP-3E ARIES II signals surveillance aircraft and a People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) J-8II interceptor fighter jet resulted in an international dispute between the United States and the People's Republic of China called the Hainan Island incident.
2001 – War in Afghanistan. The War on Terrorism begins with Operation Enduring Freedom. On October 7, 2001, U.S. Armed Forces invade Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 attacks and "begin combat action in Afghanistan against Al Qaeda terrorists and their Taliban supporters."[RL30172]
2002 – Yemen. On November 3, 2002, an American MQ-1 Predator fired a Hellfire missile at a car in Yemen killing Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi, an al-Qaeda leader thought to be responsible for the USS Cole bombing.[RL30172]
2002 – Philippines. OEF-Philippines. January 2002 U.S. "combat-equipped and combat support forces" have been deployed to the Philippines to train with, assist and advise the Philippines' Armed Forces in enhancing their "counterterrorist capabilities."[RL30172]
2002 – Côte d'Ivoire. On September 25, 2002, in response to a rebellion in Côte d'Ivoire, U.S. military personnel went into Côte d'Ivoire to assist in the evacuation of American citizens from Bouake.[8]
[RL30172]
2003–2011 – War in Iraq. Operation Iraqi Freedom. March 20, 2003. The United States leads a coalition that includes Britain, Australia and Spain to invade Iraq with the stated goal being "to disarm Iraq in pursuit of peace, stability, and security both in the Gulf region and in the United States."[RL30172]
2003 – Liberia. Second Liberian Civil War. On June 9, 2003, President Bush reported that on June 8 he had sent about 35 U.S. Marines into Monrovia, Liberia, to help secure the U.S. Embassy in Nouakchott, Mauritania, and to aid in any necessary evacuation from either Liberia or Mauritania.[RL30172]
2003 – Georgia and Djibouti. "US combat equipped and support forces" had been deployed to Georgia and Djibouti to help in enhancing their "counterterrorist capabilities."[9]
2004 – Haiti. 2004 Haïti rebellion occurs. The US first sent 55 combat equipped military personnel to augment the U.S. Embassy security forces there and to protect American citizens and property in light. Later 200 additional US combat-equipped, military personnel were sent to prepare the way for a UN Multinational Interim Force, MINUSTAH.[RL30172]
2004 – War on Terrorism: U.S. anti-terror related activities were underway in Georgia, Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia, Yemen, and Eritrea.[10]
2004–present: Drone attacks in Pakistan
2005–06 – Pakistan. President Bush deploys troops from US Army Air Cav Brigades to provide Humanitarian relief to far remote villages in the Kashmir mountain ranges of Pakistan stricken by a massive earthquake.
2006 – Lebanon. U.S. Marine Detachment, the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit[citation needed], begins evacuation of U.S. citizens willing to leave the country in the face of a likely ground invasion by Israel and continued fighting between Hezbollah and the Israeli military.[11][12]
2007 – Somalia. Battle of Ras Kamboni. On January 8, 2007, while the conflict between the Islamic Courts Union and the Transitional Federal Government continues, an AC-130 gunship conducts an aerial strike on a suspected al-Qaeda operative, along with other Islamist fighters, on Badmadow Island near Ras Kamboni in southern Somalia.[13]
2008 – South Ossetia, Georgia. Helped Georgia humanitarian aid,[14] helped to transport Georgian forces from Iraq during the conflict. In the past, the US has provided training and weapons to Georgia.
2010–present[edit source | editbeta]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations

[davidpdx]

89. One distinction I'd make in that list is that some of those were evacuation of embassies

In those cases they are not hostile acts, but the retrieval of our own citizens including ambassadors.

[Warren Stupidity]

92. You are missing the larger picture.

You and others are searching for a moment when our troops were not engaged in actual combat in order to proclaim peace. We've been in a state of war, undeclared of course except for WWII, since 1941. When the Soviet Union, our primary justification for our military stance, unexpectedly collapsed, we invented new reasons to continue - we developed a new ideological position to justify permanent war. We found new enemies and here we are doing what we've been doing for 70 years.

[davidpdx]

93. Still my point stands that the evacuation of embassies is not combat

We have a duty to get our diplomats and their families who serve our country. The others, yes, they are combat or military intervention, or war, or whatever you want to call it. I agree on most of those occasions we would have been better off not being involved. I'm not sure if you have ever lived overseas in a country that is unstable or near one that is unstable (there are plenty of those these days). I'll tell you the first couple months living in Korea the air raid sirens used to scare the hell out of me. Now they don't, but I still take the possibility of that asswipe Kim Jong Um doing something rash.

[Mr.Bill]

77. Except for during the Carter administration. n/t

[avebury]

48. You have to remember that we actually

had an industrial base which also helped to get us out of the depression. It is hard to turn an economy around if it is more service industry related. Big business had out sourced way to much of our industrial capability.

When we had the industrial base and development of unions, people earned a decent wage, families could function in a one income household if they chose, and companies did well post depression.

[Progressive dog]

64. We had an obsolete industrial base

that had nothing to do with getting us out of the depression. The unions were nurtured by FDR, who was elected because of the depression.

[free0352]

85. Rread History

Prior to WWII US troops fought in the Banana Wars: in Nicaragua from 1912 to 1933, Cuba from 1917-1922, Hati from 1915-1934, Honduras from 1905-1925. Also US troops deployed to the Philippines to fight in the Philippine Insurrection from 1899-1902 and later China from 1927-1941. Smedley Butler even wrote a book about it called "War is a racket."

So sorry to inform you of the history, but the United States has been doing small wars for a long, long time.

[sarisataka]

6. We should have learned before...

give the UN inspectors the time they need.

[dionysus]

7. i wish you had a "not at this present time" option

[cali]

9. I think that would be a no.

[dionysus]

10. ok then.

[cthulu2016]

8. Not much. Here is what I might support a tad more...

Simultaneous cruise missile strikes timed so they all hit at the same time, only on facilities we have strong reason to believe are storing such agents, and publicly announced (with the targets identified) when the missiles are ten minutes away from the sites, urging immediate evacuation of the facilities.

If we are upset about chemicals but are not trying to oust Assad then target the response as narrowly as possible to fit the ostensible cause for action.

I don't know whether I would support that, but I would support it more than what we will probably end up doing.

A war on chemicals waged on humanitarian grounds to prevent their future use, if that is what it is, should be a war on chemicals.

[Dragonfli]

71. I am no expert, but based on common sense concerns I would like to know what chemical agent experts

Know scientifically to be the dangers of air strikes on sites where such chemicals are stored/produced.

It seems to me that bombing such facilities may actually cause death and/or extreme harm to all life within the chemical fallout radius as well as areas where wind dispersal might take any agents not completely destroyed by explosives.

Might this be a case similar to blowing up a radioactive materials stockpile that could turn an attempt at destroying the threat into a much larger airborne threat unintentionally created by us?
Could our "humanitarian" bombs turn into "dirty bombs" killing far more than our villains might using the same materials.


I wonder if there even is such a thing as using bombs to protect people from chemical weapons. I wonder if the act of trying will instead kill more people with the chemicals than our enemies ever would.

Expert scientific knowledge should at least be considered (my own preference would be to give science the final word) before blowing all these things up.

[Johonny]

11. I've yet to here a viable argument from the government that such strikes

have a high probability of working. Indeed no one seems to know even what working would actually mean.

[MelungeonWoman]

12. No! Until proven otherwise,

I assume Cheney and his associates responsible for the attacks.


ALWAYS FOLLOW THE MONEY.

[Javaman]

14. +1

It's another Hans Blix situation.

and I find that disgusting.

[geek tragedy]

15. Based on what I know currently, oppose. nt

But I don't know what I will know.

[Chan790]

17. I believe we need to be pushing for an on-the-ground armed multinational peacekeeping force.

Neither of the options really applies, though the use of strikes against combatant forces committing war crimes needs to be a tool in the arsenal of any such force along with authorization to engage combat with hostile forces to that peacekeeping mission.

[jeff47]

20. That is a bad idea

The problem is Syria is every single side of the civil war is awful.

You put boots on the ground, then you are going to effectively pick a winner. And the winner you pick will be awful.

[roamer65]

21. The Mideast map is about to be redrawn.

These are the dominoes Bush set into motion in 2003 by his stupid invasion of Iraq.

The map that was created after WW1 is about to be redrawn through a regional ME war.

[KittyWampus]

23. Most political analysts are predicting strikes on hard targets not Assad's forces.

Retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who was the NATO commander during the 1999 Operation Allied Force in Kosovo, tells All Things Considered that the situation the United Staes is facing in Syria is best compared to the U.S. bombing of Iraq in 1993.

snip said.

The Obama administration has said that regime change would not be the point of any mission in Syria.

"I want to make clear that the options that we are considering are not about regime change," White House spokesman Jay Carney said during a briefing. "They are about responding to a clear violation of international standard that prohibits the use of chemical weapons."

snip

Instead Clark points to attacks directed by President Clinton against the headquarters of the Iraqi Intelligence Service on June 27, 1993.

[cali]

29. whatever. I know your're gung ho

[KittyWampus]

32. You are wrong. So let it be noted, you don't bother to read what people post.

typical.

[jberryhill]

53. Is it your innate moral superiority which entitles you to speak to others like that?

Were you born with the ability to reduce character assessments of complex human beings to a few words, or is it something you learned over time?

[U4ikLefty]

55. No, it's the history of the poster that makes the point obvious.

Just like yours.

[KamaAina]

24. The people of DU have spoken.

121-7. You'd have trouble getting 121 DUers to agree that the sky is blue.

And yet the tiny pro-war faction is speaking just as vocally as the vast majority of the rest of us. Hmmmm.

[Harmony Blue]

25. No!

No way!

[meow2u3]

26. No, but not for the reasons you think

I oppose intervention in Syria because I'm not sure if the Assad regime or the rebels used the chemical weapons. I also have reservations because I don't know if the rebels are terrorists or fighters for democracy. I don't want to be responsible for bringing a possible terrorist into power.

[Chisox08]

27. NO

Because kicking a hornet's nest is not a wise thing to do. Bad things happen in the world it's a fact, but we can not stop them all. Getting involved in this Syrian civil war could make things a lot worst for the people in Syria and cause us to have to deal with another generation of terrorist that we created when we bombed their homes.

[Hayabusa]

28. Yes, with the caveat that

the gas attacks on civilians are Assad's work as I believe them to be.

[cali]

30. this pretty much mirrors the opinion of the general public

[Flying Squirrel]

41. Interesting

Usually the general public is much worse-informed than DU, yet the numbers are still the same.

I'd say a change is needed up in the Ministry of Information.

:sad, weary sarcasm:

[alcibiades_mystery]

31. No

[Donald Ian Rankin]

33. "Probably not".

It seems probable, but not certain, that they'd do more harm than good.

[Lionel Mandrake]

34. Let's talk about war crimes,

or more technically, crimes against peace. Waging war against a nation that has not threatened you in any way is a crime against peace. This was one of the four main charges against the top Nazis at the Nuremberg trials.

Hitler et al. were certainly guilty for the attack on Poland. Stalin et al. were equally guilty, but as victors they were never tried. Originally they had been allied with Hitler (via the so-called non-aggression pact), but were stabbed in the back before they got a chance to stab the Nazis in the back. After June 1941, the dirty commies became our gallant allies. This cynical about-face lasted until 1945. But i digress.

W et al. were guilty for the attack on Iraq. Saddam Hussein, you will recall, was a very bad person who had used gas on some of his own people. Sound familiar?

I hate to see Obama threatening to follow in W's footsteps on this.

[H2O Man]

36. No.

Definitely not by the US.

[kentuck]

37. At this time...

NO.

[Autumn]

38. Not only no, but hell no.

I will not support another war or military action of any kind.

[woo me with science]

39. Hell no.

Kick.

[bigwillq]

40. No (nt)

[cali]

42. kick

[joshcryer]

43. Nice poll debunking the DUers are warmongers outrage.

[cali]

44. thought it would be interesting to see the numbers n/t

[joshcryer]

46. I always appreciate a nice clean poll.

No snark, right to the point.

[steve2470]

47. another vote for HELL FUCKING NO nt

[11 Bravo]

49. Right now, based on what I KNOW (not think or suppose), the answer is no.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

50. No straight up or down on this issue...

If cruise missiles can effectively neutralize his ability to use chemical weapons against civilians, then I would tentatively approve it, provided both U.N. and the Arab League give their support.

Otherwise, no.

[gopiscrap]

51. Not just no, but HELL NO!!!!

[BuelahWitch]

52. No

[Harmony Blue]

54. No!

[Dawson Leery]

56. NO!

[AsahinaKimi]

58. is there a "HELL NO!" option?

okay, than I have to simply say no.

[erpowers]

61. Topple Assad

I think President Assas should be toppled.

[ConcernedCanuk]

62. Let the locals do it then - USA has enough troubles right at home.

.
.
.

CC

[erpowers]

79. It Seems They Cannot

It seems the locals are unable to topple Assad. I do realize that we have troubles here in America and it might be hard even for America to topple Assad. However, I wonder how many people have to die before America steps in and at least tries to put a stop to the things Assad is doing even if he did not use chemical weapons against his people.

[ConcernedCanuk]

82. Yeah - ur right - USA sure did Iraq a favor by removing Saddam

.
.
.

It's all peaceful in Iraq now . . .

CC

[eridani]

91. Wonderful. Then we get islamists with "Christians to Beirut; Alawites to the grave"

That is to say cheerleading for ethnic cleansing and genocide.

[erpowers]

95. Does Not Have To Be That Way

I do not think it has to be that way. I think there are ways to prevent ethnic cleansing. In addition, what would be the alternative to toppling Assad? Should America just sit by and let Assad continue to kill his own people?

[eridani]

97. Yes. Because far more people will be killed with US military intervention

Saddam was much worse than Assad, and toppling him left Iraq as a long-term disaster area where a thousand or so people are killed every week.

To side with the rebels is to side with ethnic cleansing--Assad is at least defending Alawites and Christians.

[Cali_Democrat]

63. 93% say no

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

66. NO!

[Throd]

67. As I post this, no.

[jsr]

69. Nope. Stay out.

[REP]

70. Straight Up and Down - I love that song!

A big Fuck No on yet another pointless war.

[Coyotl]

72. Let the global community deal with global problems. What hubris to assume so much self importance

that we should feel obligated to police the world--at best a lame excuse for imperialism.

[Riftaxe]

74. Hell No.

No matter which side wins, it is the Syrian people who will lose in the end.

We have an existing hostile regime fighting with people who want to slaughter us....let them fight it out. Life is not fair sometimes, deal with it.

[David__77]

76. No no no!

I'd prefer it was 99% agreement, but we're on the right track.

[grahamhgreen]

80. Kick. Won't get fooled again.

[myrna minx]

81. No!

[CBGLuthier]

86. After 50 years of it I am sick of watching america pretend to fix the world

while fucking it over in the name of selling ammunition and jets and tanks and whatever the fuck. We create problems and then we have to solve them. The world will be a lot better off when we stop this shit.

[Marr]

87. Bet I could name all the "yes" votes. /nt

[sabrina 1]

88. Wow, DU is definitely reflecting the Mainstream only 9% of the American

people support any intervention in Syria.

Democratic principles ARE The Mainstream, contrary to the notion we've seen around that Progressives are 'the fringe'.

[davidpdx]

90. No, I think the situation is too complex

But at the same time I don't think we should sit back and say "it isn't our problem". There was an article in another thread that stated other possible ways of helping including humanitarian aid.

I have heard some people question whether the use of gas occurred. For me there is no doubt it did, the question is who used it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023560843

[Iggo]

94. I am 100% against military strikes on Syria at this time.

[arely staircase]

98. undecided, leaning now toward yes. nt