Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria

[Rashiminos]

Depends.
If Obama believes his [classified, don't let ordinary Americans see it] sources, he may already have made the determination.

I'll be just amazed if he takes any concrete action.

I wouldn't be amazed. See Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, et al.

 

[bugwar]

Your post seemed to imply they were. Considering you had a picture of a drone.

Artistic license.

Besides, do you really believe that U.S. drones won't be flitting over Syria during the strikes?

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

Besides, do you really believe that U.S. drones won't be flitting over Syria during the strikes?

Yes. Because Syria's air defense capabilities are quite good. We don't want to throw away drones.

That is why cruise missiles are being used.

 

[Defiant47]

The evolution towards bots doing all the sanctioned killing of humans continues, as noted in a an article in Time magazine:

“...The discretion was partly because Israel is not being called upon to take part in the strikes the United States is planning –
which the Israelis gather will involve only cruise missiles, so as not to endanger U.S. pilots — and partly because Washington
prefers to emphasize the support for the strikes from other quarters.”

Bolded text added by me.

Source: http://world.time.com/2013/08/29/is...s-masks-as-u-s-ponders-syria-missile-strikes/

If we have determined that going to war with a country is the right thing... should we also needlessly sacrifice a bunch of our own people to feel better about it?

Why haven't we seen mass protests about all this war sabre rattling?

People are "against" the potential war, but maybe they realize its necessity? Given the high number of people that do not support intervention in the U.S., I'd expect a whole bunch of these protests.

I certainly hope people don't wait until after we're well-embroidered in a war to start protesting it, although I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[DemonicAppleGuY]

I certainly hope people don't wait until after we're well-embroidered in a war to start protesting it, although I wouldn't be surprised.

I doubt we will be "well-embroidered" in a war.

It will probably be nothing more than missile barrage that lasts a few days at most that ends with the Assad regime apologizing for the use of chemical weapons. Then back to business as usual.

The US has no interest in stopping the violence.

The US especially has no interest in the cleanup once the fighting is over.

It's about sending a message, not changing much.

 

[Rashiminos]

I doubt we will be "well-embroidered" in a war..

Clearly not a fan of "A stitch in time saves nine."

So you're not part of the tapestry, eh?

 

[bugwar]

Yes. Because Syria's air defense capabilities are quite good.

They didn't seem to bother the airstrike made by Israel last month.
Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/07/13/israel-air-strike-syria/2515095/

 

[bugwar]

If we have determined that going to war with a country is the right thing... should we also needlessly sacrifice a bunch of our own people to feel better about it?

Right thing, eh?

The easier it is to kill those who disagree with you without a personal risk, the easier it is to justify that it is the 'Right' thing to do.

 

[Defiant47]

Right thing, eh?

The easier it is to kill those who disagree with you without a personal risk, the easier it is to justify that it is the 'Right' thing to do.

The decision-makers behind these wars are seldom ever at "personal risk", so it makes little to no difference.

 

[bugwar]

The decision-makers behind these wars are seldom ever at "personal risk", so it makes little to no difference.

While you raise a good point, remember that in most western nations the decision-makers want validation by those they govern.
Kill off too many of your own people in conducting a war, and your decision-making days are over.
Hence the appeal of sending in the droids.

 

[Defiant47]

Right thing, eh?

The easier it is to kill those who disagree with you without a personal risk, the easier it is to justify that it is the 'Right' thing to do.

While you raise a good point, remember that in most western nations the decision-makers want validation by those they govern.
Kill off too many of your own people in conducting a war, and your decision-making days are over.
Hence the appeal of sending in the droids.

A valid point.

But it just doesn't feel right to needlessly sacrifice lives in order to reduce the likelihood of corruption that would lead to needlessly lost lives.

 

[keli]

Finally the Brits do something right : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23892783

Let's hope Cameron will keep his word.

 

[kramerfan86]

What a novel idea getting approval from your nation's legislature. Our wannabe king seems to think neither approval of his own people, legislature, the UN, or international law really applies to him personally.

 

[bhsup]

I stand with him as far as the UN is concerned.

 

[kramerfan86]

Id respect his "screw the UN" stance more if it was his unilateral stance, when its only the stance when the UN wont do what we want it to its childish and stupid. Either play ball or dont.

 

[Commodore]

Again ,you're intervening in someone else's argument without understanding the context.

Funny how this exact same statement could be said to the pro-interventionists about Syria.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Beautiful break-down, thank you.

Thanks

 

[ReindeerThistle]

I stand with him as far as the UN is concerned.

VRWC, I TOLD you we have more in common than you think!

6. It is the duty of any party wishing to belong to the Third International to expose, not only avowed social-patriotism, but also the falsehood and hypocrisy of social-pacifism. It must systematically demonstrate to the workers that, without the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism, no international arbitration courts, no talk about a reduction of armaments, no “democratic” reorganisation of the League of Nations will save mankind from new imperialist wars.
-- V. I. Lenin; Terms of Admission into Communist International July 1920

Switch "UN" for "League of Nations" and you have the situation today.

Joooooooooooin us!

Sent via mobile.

 

[Kyriakos]

Finally the Brits do something right : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23892783

Let's hope Cameron will keep his word.

While it is good that the British parliament voted against the UK attacking Syria, this won't be enough to stop the other loons-that-be across the pond.

It is quite frightening that the US president has by now so much power that he can pretty much order missiles to be fired against a country, without having public support or getting a vote from congress. The rhetoric used is even more childish than the one utilised by Bush and his own cronies. "There has to be a clear message against Assad". What the hell kind of ludicrous 5-year old thinking is that? Of course Obama doesn't think that way, but he can afford to speak that way, no care at all about the public since it has been so divided by now that it is simply neutralised.

You know, Bush was just disastrous. And Obama is by now not only more of the same, but even more detrimental to the world. Things are not going well at all.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

^^^
Tru Dat.

Sent via mobile.