Thread: Strike against Syria

Originally Posted by Jimbo

I have not been following this story or this thread, so please forgive me if I don't know details.

Getting involved in other countries is always fraught with difficulty, as history has shown. I really feel for the US in these situations because, rightly or wrongly, the world looks to them in these kinds of circumstances to at least take the lead.

I think a bigger question than arguing over the evidence or lack thereof of genocide in Syria is why do we all expect the US to go in swinging? Historical precedent? Wanting them to take the fallout?

It would be nice if the rest of the world stopped hiding behind our US cousin's skirts and stepped up if they are really bothered about something. It would send a message that there are some things the entire world think are unacceptable. If we want a better world I think we need to send a united message.

If we are not prepared to do that, then perhaps we really don't care all that much that a government is prepared to kill its own citizens. And if that's the case, then perhaps we deserve the world we've allowed to develop.

James.

Originally Posted by MickR

I don't think the rest of the world is hiding behind the US, I think the US has just stepped up because that's what the US does the most, assumes control, even if the assumption is wrong. I think the US is wrong for stepping up as fast as they have, due to the lack of 'real' evidence. I have no doubt given time that some 'real' evidence can be fabricated, and indeed, has already started to show up, but it isn't pointing directly to a culprit. Everyone on the world power stage has jumped to the conclusion that Assad is the culprit all the same.


Mick

Really you two ????


Less then 1 week ago: Aug 28th

"World leaders have issued a string of bellicose statements in the last 24 hours, with Iran and Russia standing alongside the Assad regime against an emerging western alliance led by the US, UK, France and Australia. Iran's foreign ministry spokesman, Abbas Araqchi, intimated that Tehran would respond, should the west strike."


Did you guys not get the word that AU was on board here ????

If this in fact happened(chemical weapons used) and nobody does anything about it, then the world has become a more dangerous place than it was already. The message is that you can violate INTL laws and nobody will do anything about it. China has stated their belief that a diplomatic solution is necessary. We are regressing to pre WW2 ideology. ANd that didn't play out too well now did it?

Originally Posted by bill3152

If this in fact happened(chemical weapons used) and nobody does anything about it, then the world has become a more dangerous place than it was already. The message is that you can violate INTL laws and nobody will do anything about it. China has stated their belief that a diplomatic solution is necessary. We are regressing to pre WW2 ideology. ANd that didn't play out too well now did it?

Leaving Syria without punishment for using chemical weapons is a strong signal for all the other governments to do the same in the future. Letting the extremists get away without punishment means they can hit again, and the next time might be on our own soils.
Solving this paradox without starting a full scale war and casual damages really takes calm nerves and diplomatic skills between all counterparts.

Originally Posted by Sailor

Solving this paradox without starting a full scale war and casual damages really takes calm nerves and diplomatic skills between all counterparts.

Paradoxically, the only way to solve this diplomatically would be for Assad to believe we are ready to start a full scale war if diplomacy didn't work. Our problem is nobody believes we're willing to do that. That's one reason I think the President's decision to try to get Congress' approval for military action is a good one. It will at least give the impression of some sort of resolve on the part of the U.S.

We have the capability to solve this militarily but it will be at great cost and there are some big questions that should be answered before we commit to that. First question, is the cost worth it? I don't think very many people think it will be. This is a huge problem because if you're going to have credibility at the negotiating table, the other side has to believe you're ready, willing, and able to resort to force. Second question, what comes next? Will we be able to make Syria any better off after the fighting is over? Again, lots of doubts here. It's very likely that Syria would be even worse off after the war is over unless we take complete control of the country and attempt to rebuild it, which takes a long time and lots of cash (and that plays back into the first question).

As terrible as the current state of affairs is, there is no easy way to make it better. We really need to ask ourselves what's in our long-term national interest and in the best interest of our allies? The risk of people thinking they can get away with using chemical weapons may be a bit less important than a U.S. government driven into bankruptcy.

I'm going to go ahead and drop a Rand Paul 2016.

Also I think cutting ALL foreign aid would be a step in the right direction. I mean we are funding this very debate with our tax dollars.

Originally Posted by JBHoren

Think 1492:Jews:Spanish Inquisition

Yeah, though not a written call, the crusades sort of spring to mind too.

I'm split on this subject (of intervening). I'd hate to see nations sit by and let it happen, but I'm not sure what intervening will do to help. I hate seeing the video of little kids being hurt; it's very disturbing. I'm really, really, really negative about pretty much everything at the moment, the whole state of the world is f*&%ed up as far as I can tell. I keep trying to do the best I can in my everyday life to 'be good'. Problem is, when I hear of this sort of shit it makes me angry; and I get angry at the average person in the street. I need to turn that around and, rather than getting angry, show more love and try to think about what I am doing NOW; am I doing 'good' or am I doing 'bad'?

Sometimes shitty things like this can make one think about things deeply and come out the other end a better person; concentrating on what is REALLY important, rather than what 'stuff' we bought today, or if our car is new enough, or our phone is new enough. I know I'm off topic (almost), but there is no solution to this stuff, but there are, maybe, lessons...

I think the whole world just needs to do more surfing and more dope smoking, basically...

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Really you two ????


Less then 1 week ago: Aug 28th

"World leaders have issued a string of bellicose statements in the last 24 hours, with Iran and Russia standing alongside the Assad regime against an emerging western alliance led by the US, UK, France and Australia. Iran's foreign ministry spokesman, Abbas Araqchi, intimated that Tehran would respond, should the west strike."


Did you guys not get the word that AU was on board here ????

I listened to a documentary the other day that suggested that the mistaken idea that America's involvement in WWII turned the tide of the war resulted in the stance it now has as 'world cop'. The documentary suggested that the tide of WWII had turned prior to this. It also suggested that the reason for America's involvement in WWII was rather ironic given what it was doing to colored folk (i.e. it's OK to persecute colored folk but not for Hitler to persecute Jews). The documentary suggested that following from that, America has led the way. Of course, a whole bunch of religious stuff was raised too (basically about 'protecting' Israel). It was an interesting documentary.

Now, before you fire back, this is not my opinion, but was the opinion of two American guys, one being Oliver Stone (I forget the other). I don't have all the facts and think no-one does, but it was an interesting stance on the 'reason' for America being seen as 'big brother' or 'the world's cop' by some.

Having said that, I guess at times I'm happy to be hiding behind America's nuclear weapons, though the whole scenario has been bringing shit our way lately.

Maybe EVERY country should be Sweden; neutral with lots of chocolate, nice mountains and interesting looking cows?

Originally Posted by gssixgun

...You do realize that the US is NOT a democracy right ???...

I'm very interested in what it IS then? Do we need a new designator and what should that be?

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

I'm very interested in what it IS then? Do we need a new designator and what should that be?

When the president starts bypassing the constitution and assumes all the power, he becomes a dictator, so it would be a dictatorship. The people's, it's never going to get better, my voice doesn't matter. Is the reason this car has started veering off the road.