Menu
By:
Filters
What's new

Syria...

Keleynal said:
In the Congressional hearing taking place right now, Kerry stated in no uncertain terms that they are 100% convinced that Assad used the weapons and also that the rebels have not. So we can believe that or not, but the evidence is there beyond a reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

I am now also convinced. The UN experts were allowed to check whether chemical weapons were used or not, only because they guaranteed Putin to not check who used it.
 
Euchale said:
Because he supports Assad. And if the UN-experts found out that Assad used it, Russia would have to agree on fighting against Assad.
Click to expand...

That's mind boggling to me. I can't imagine covering up an atrocity like that just for political gain. I guess some people really don't have a moral compass.
 
Keleynal said:
That's mind boggling to me. I can't imagine covering up an atrocity like that just for political gain. I guess some people really don't have a moral compass.
Click to expand...

Please tell me you already knew this please Kel!!! :)
 
It seems to me many people treat government and politicians in a similar manner to God and religion. They put blind faith into them and assume they are good, just, care about you and your well being and believe and do what they say. Anytime I see a President speaking, Senate hearing, congressional meeting or some other situation where a bunch of politicians meet up, all I see is a crime scene.

I don't believe for a second the situation being portrayed on mainstream media about Syria is the truth. Our involvement there, just like it has been in other places and wars, is far from the bullshit being shoveled into the populations face.[DOUBLEPOST=1378623998,1378623945][/DOUBLEPOST]Here some addition alternate media.

Sep 11, 2012


May 28, 2013



 
Harlequin said:
It seems to me many people treat government and politicians in a similar manner to God and religion. They put blind faith into them and assume they are good, just, care about you and your well being and believe and do what they say. Anytime I see a President speaking, Senate hearing, congressional meeting or some other situation where a bunch of politicians meet up, all I see is a crime scene.

I don't believe for a second the situation being portrayed on mainstream media about Syria is the truth. Our involvement there, just like it has been in other places and wars, is far from the bullshit being shoveled into the populations face.[DOUBLEPOST=1378623998,1378623945][/DOUBLEPOST]Here some addition alternate media.

Sep 11, 2012


May 28, 2013



Click to expand...


Oh the conspiracies! Now the problem is, if you try to back this up with facts, you will have a hard time. Also World War 3 has of course already begun. The problem is, your enemy is no longer defined by the country they life in, but by the ideology (be it religion or political believes) so you cannot fight that "one" country and get rid of it all.
 
According to a recent CNN story, although most Americans agree that Assad is gassing hi own people, 8 out of 10 don't want to get involved.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/09/politics/syria-poll-main/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

I can understand that. If it was conventional weapons, I'd agree, but I really don't want to embolden dictators to use chemical weapons with impunity. I think it would be best if non-military reprisals could be used, but I can't think of anything else we can do.

Obama recently announced an increase in aid going to the Syrian people, bringing the total to over $1 billion.
http://www.usaid.gov/crisis/syria
I think cutting this would hurt the average person more than the Assad regime.
 
Euchale said:
Oh the conspiracies! Now the problem is, if you try to back this up with facts, you will have a hard time. Also World War 3 has of course already begun. The problem is, your enemy is no longer defined by the country they life in, but by the ideology (be it religion or political believes) so you cannot fight that "one" country and get rid of it all.
Click to expand...

I don't consider the war on terror to be a World War. You need nation-states formally involved for that. The scale and number of deaths don't even compare to the WWI and WWII.
 
If you feel so strongly we should invade Syria to stop his use of chemical weapons on his people, because killing people will normal weapons is fine, join the military and do it yourself. Its a lot easier to sit back and say this and that should be done when its other people going to war.
 
Harlequin said:
If you feel so strongly we should invade Syria to stop his use of chemical weapons on his people, because killing people will normal weapons is fine, join the military and do it yourself. Its a lot easier to sit back and say this and that should be done when its other people going to war.
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention. I spent 6 years in the Marine Corps from 2003-2009, so been there, done that.

Also, no one is suggesting an 'invasion.' That would be crazy, unneccessary, and stupid.

Please check your facts before channeling Michael Moore.
 
Speaking of alternative measures- this is interesting. Apparently Sec of State Johns Kerry offhandedly remarked that Syria could avoid an airstrike by turning over all their chemical weapons to international ( I assume UN control). Russia has apparently jumped all over that, adding they would pressure Syria to formally join the a anti-chemical national accord.

I'm actually in favor of this solution even though Kerry is walking it back, IF (big if) we can have confidence that Assad will actually follow through. Hopefully, he learned from Iraq that if/when you get rid of your WMDs, you want to make it REALLY obvious so you don't leave the excuse open.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...loats-plan-to-avert-military-strike-on-syria/
 
EDIT: My typing has failed me yet again, this was before Kel posted twice.

Well that's the dumbest argument yet. Nobody wants boots on the ground. I don't think anybody's even saying the US has to defeat Assad, there just has to be a clear message that committing war crimes has consequences. Those consequences being a shitload of missiles up your ass.

Doubting the intelligence or not wanting to jump the gun and demanding every other course of action has been exhausted before ordering a strike makes sense. But that CNN poll has shown the US public just doesn't give a shit about the rest of the world, period. "A strike wouldn't be in our best interest, so fuck it. War crimes and principles be damned, it doesn't affect us so it isn't our problem." It seems we're still centuries away from actually creating a global community.
 
Daniel Fortesque said:
EDIT: My typing has failed me yet again, this was before Kel posted twice.

Well that's the dumbest argument yet. Nobody wants boots on the ground. I don't think anybody's even saying the US has to defeat Assad, there just has to be a clear message that committing war crimes has consequences. Those consequences being a shitload of missiles up your ass.

Doubting the intelligence or not wanting to jump the gun and demanding every other course of action has been exhausted before ordering a strike makes sense. But that CNN poll has shown the US public just doesn't give a shit about the rest of the world, period. "A strike wouldn't be in our best interest, so fuck it. War crimes and principles be damned, it doesn't affect us so it isn't our problem." It seems we're still centuries away from actually creating a global community.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think the US does provide aid, economic and military to a lot of situations that aren't "our business" because there's no direct impact on us. I think we are a little fatigued after Iraq, and it's not clear what an airstrike would accomplish.

In my opinion, this poll was a little early. We haven't even heard what Obama's proposal would actually entail, how long it would take, what it would accomplish, ect. I think this 8/10 disapproval is knee-jerk reaction. In general, most people are against blowing other people up, and that's a good thing in general.
 
The US does provide a lot of aid, but does the public know and agree? I mean, probably, yeah, actually. I really shouldn't go off polls and surveys and the vocal online minority anyway. It's just that crimes against humanity make me see red.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom