I suppose it was just a matter of time - U.S. military beginning review of Syria options - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Although the U.S. focus remains on exerting diplomatic and economic pressure on Syria, the Pentagon and the U.S. Central Command have begun a preliminary internal review of U.S. military capabilities, CNN has learned. The options are being prepared in the event President Barack Obama were to call for them. Two senior administration officials who spoke about the review to CNN emphasized that U.S. policy for now remains the use of non-military options. The focus on diplomatic options was underscored by the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in an interview with CNN on Tuesday. "Before we start talking about military options, we very much want to ensure that we have exhausted all the political, economic and diplomatic means at our disposal," Ambassador Susan Rice said on CNN's “Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.” The president has also said that the U.S. is working on non-military options first. "I think it is very important for us to try to resolve this without recourse to outside military intervention, and I think that's possible," Obama said in an interview with NBC News that aired during the Super Bowl on Sunday. But the military is beginning to look at what can be done. One of the senior U.S. officials called the effort a “scoping exercise” to see what capabilities are available given other U.S. military commitments in the region. Both officials pointed out that this type of planning exercise is typical for the Pentagon, which would not want to be in the position of not having options for the president, if and when they are asked for. It would be Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, who would provide details on what U.S. military assets are available, what missions they could perform if asked, and what risks U.S. forces might face. “The Pentagon is closely monitoring developments in Syria. It wouldn’t be doing its job if it didn’t put some ideas on the table,” one of the senior U.S. officials told CNN. “But absolutely no decisions have been made on military support for Syria.” The two officials were not willing to be identified because they were not authorized to talk to the media. Typically those types of options are held by the Pentagon as very preliminary plans and not even forwarded to the White House unless asked for. If asked, plans are then fleshed out with specific units to support them. In this type of analysis being done, the military would typically look at all options ranging from humanitarian relief, to support for opposition groups, as well as outright military strikes, although that is an unlikely option, both officials said. “This remains a campaign to apply economic and diplomatic pressure,” the first official said. The military’s work to analyze potential military options for Syria has been quietly going on for several weeks, two administration officials confirm to CNN. The bulk of the analysis is being done by staff of General Mattis, who would be the senior commander if the President were to order any action. Mattis’ analysis is being shared with General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who would then present options to the White House, if it came to that. “We don’t want to be in the position of suddenly dusting off some five year old plan,” one official said. The official emphasized the work is extremely preliminary but said the military would look at a full range of contingencies. Arizona Sen. John McCain, the top Republican on the Armed Services committee, told reporters Tuesday that the U.S. should consider "all options including arming the opposition." But U.S. officials said that adding weapons into the volatile and violent situation is not a viable option. "We never take anything off the table. The president does (or) doesn't. However, as the president himself made absolutely clear and as the secretary has continued to say, we don't think more arms into Syria is the answer," said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/07/us-military-beginning-review-of-syria-options/?hpt=hp_t2[/url]

Definitely should support the opposition groups, china and russia's veto's can suck a dick.

just because the army is looking into plans, doesn't mean they are fully ready to go. it just means that they have the plans if they have to use them (which i don't think we should anyway). Even the article says that war would be the very last option.

Ugh...more war for America. Time to move to Canada.

I'm all for the US downsizing their army and not getting involved in foreign countries, but someone has to do something

As much as I don't want my country going into ANOTHER war, I feel like Syria needs help if it's people ever want to be free.

It's ok, we're running out of oppressive dictatorships to invade.

[QUOTE=faze;34605194]Ugh...more war for America. Time to move to Canada.[/QUOTE] Rated winner because humanitarianism is for losers! Yeah!

[QUOTE=ewitwins;34605265]Rated winner because humanitarianism is for losers! Yeah![/QUOTE] So we're losers for not helping in Rwanda?

Throw our support(secretly) behind the protest and rebel groups, conduct clandestine operations against Swears and his military assets.

[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;34605308]Throw our support(secretly) behind the protest and rebel groups, conduct clandestine operations against Swears and his military assets.[/QUOTE] Oh wow, thanks for ruining the secret. Report to the reeducation chamber at once, private!

[QUOTE=Hidole555;34605342]Oh wow, thanks for ruining the secret. Report to the reeducation chamber at once, private![/QUOTE] Avatar fits.

[QUOTE=faze;34605194]Ugh...more war for America. Time to move to Canada.[/QUOTE] Yeah because Libya took so long to solve and America wasted billions helping them. Oh wait.

[QUOTE=faze;34605194]Ugh...more war for America. Time to move to Canada.[/QUOTE] Y'know, its douchebags like you that Ron Paul wants, because he knows that greedy fuckers would love to sell arms to both sides. Cough, the last time we went 'isolationist' cough.

[QUOTE=VengfulSoldier;34605457]sell arms to both sides.[/QUOTE] I am reminded of the Jackal from Farcry 2. This Jackal Tape might be the most related. [video=youtube;2XxmfQnP7x8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XxmfQnP7x8[/video] Insert video not working.

[QUOTE=VengfulSoldier;34605457]Y'know, its douchebags like you that Ron Paul wants, because he knows that greedy fuckers would love to sell arms to both sides. Cough, the last time we went 'isolationist' cough.[/QUOTE] Why am I a douchebag that wants to sell arms to both sides?

[QUOTE=Hidole555;34605488]I am reminded of the Jackal from Farcry 2.[/QUOTE] I am reminded of America during both World Wars before we joined in :v: [editline]8th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=faze;34605513]Why am I a douchebag that wants to sell arms to both sides?[/QUOTE] Because you want an isolationist policy, the only good thing that comes from it is economic booms during war because we give supplies to both sides.

[QUOTE=VengfulSoldier;34605539]I am reminded of America during both World Wars before we joined in :v: [editline]8th February 2012[/editline] Because you want an isolationist policy, the only good thing that comes from it is economic booms during war because we give supplies to both sides.[/QUOTE] Right... because constant foreign intervention is good for the US :downs:

Thanks but don't screw up.

just when we all thought we were out of the danger zone with the war with Iran media blitz shit, then turns out Syria was a bigger problem in reality and they may actually try to do something fuck this

[QUOTE=Valdor;34605759]Right... because constant foreign intervention is good for the US :downs:[/QUOTE] Actually for cheap energy and shit like that it is. You guys don't realize this but we can't be isolationist, we don't have the ability to do that.

[QUOTE=VOSK;34605220]As much as I don't want my country going into ANOTHER war, I feel like Syria needs help if it's people ever want to be free.[/QUOTE] First part is true but the second part about,"Syria needs help if it's people ever want to be free" well, ill just say IRAK.

The whole WMD and Saddam thing was just a ruse so we could have a place to draw Al-Qaeda and Mujahadeen and other ridiculous extremists out to fight us. The media may portray the Taliban as still a threat, or us being over there served no purpose, But that's not true. It's basically the only way you can fight an enemy like that, anyway. Make yourself bait, fight when attacked, repeat until satisfied It's why they're finally getting the message and moving their asses to Africa now. Syria legitimately could use some outside help. it's people are openly in a conflict

[QUOTE=Hidole555;34605342]Oh wow, thanks for ruining the secret. Report to the reeducation chamber at once, private![/QUOTE] Well, it's no secret that the best thing about a secret is secretly telling someone the secret, thereby secretly adding another secret to their secret collection of secrets...secretly.

[QUOTE=TheTalon;34606272]The whole WMD and Saddam thing was just a ruse so we could have a place to draw Al-Qaeda and Mujahadeen and other ridiculous extremists out to fight us. The media may portray the Taliban as still a threat, or us being over there served no purpose, But that's not true. It's basically the only way you can fight an enemy like that, anyway. Make yourself bait, fight when attacked, repeat until satisfied It's why they're finally getting the message and moving their asses to Africa now.[/QUOTE] *That's why we're being forced into dialogue with them because we can't beat them.

[QUOTE=Stick it in her pooper;34605876]just when we all thought we were out of the danger zone with the war with Iran media blitz shit, then turns out Syria was a bigger problem in reality and they may actually try to do something fuck this[/QUOTE] When did we think we were out of the danger zone with Iran? The way the media is portraying it it seems inevitable. Also this makes me laugh [quote]The president has also said that the U.S. is working on non-military options first.[/quote] I like how Obama has to clarify that we are thinking non-military first. Man, as much as I want to see freedom for the Syrian people(and iranian) I am just tired of getting sucked into this

Hey Europe - Why don't you take this one, for a change? America really has had enough of the 'world police' thing (even if it doesn't realize it).

I hope that things can be settled with Assad abdicating (which is seriously what that guy needs to do at this point) but I wouldn't mind it one bit if we helped them like we helped Libya. [QUOTE=faze;34605282]So we're losers for not helping in Rwanda?[/QUOTE] Uh, yeah. We are.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;34606961]Hey Europe - Why don't you take this one, for a change? America really has had enough of the 'world police' thing (even if it doesn't realize it).[/QUOTE] Isn't Europe as much as the "world police" as the United States is?

[QUOTE=smurfy;34605219]I'm all for the US downsizing their army and not getting involved in foreign countries, but someone has to do something[/QUOTE] Not us. If it's handled like Libya though then not that big of a deal. :/