Syrian Government Ready To Use Chemical Weapons

[slime]

Why are Americans so interested anyway?
Waaaaaaaaaa chemical weapons are so bad waahhhhhhhhh
-DROPS AGENT ORANGE ON VIETNAM.... DROPS TWO NUKES ON JAPAN-

MERICA.

Oh shit... I forgot - there were no wars or atrocities before America existed. There was no brutality in the world at all, and anyone that made the mistake of using these such weapons cannot go back and apoligize or re-build a country - or admit they were wrong by trying to stop the same wrong action. You're right America was the birth of all human woes. It is definitly not just how humans are, well not before America anyhow.

[Rukentuts]

America had full idea of what the nukes could do which is exactly why they used them.

The same reason why Hitler kept trying to launch V2's at Britain.

And the UK had no clue what those gases would do?

We could keep this up all day. The truth is the USA isn't the only country to have used WMDs, and it is hardly the last. You can stop this "holier than thou" routine now.

[Deleted]

The UK used chlorine and later phosgene, diphosgene and mustard gas during WWI.
The UK then used mustard gas on Bolshevik troops in 1919.
Then in experiments in the 1930s exposed Indian soldiers to mustard gas to "determine appropriate battlefield dosages".

Just sayin'.

The swedish used to burn and pillage villages. The dutch practically invented slavery in Europe. The spanish came up with the Inquisition. The germans contributed to the history of humanity with 2 world wars.

Shall I go on ?! Ugly stuff that happened at some points in history does not characterize a country's people nor does make something OK just because "they did it too".

[Scinder]

America had full idea of what the nukes could do which is exactly why they used them.

The same reason why Hitler kept trying to launch V2's at Britain.

Of course they knew the damage it would cause. Do you honestly think that the American government deployed the nukes without knowing full well the repercussions of using them? The Japanese then were a cruel and malicious bunch and this was the only way to break their spirit. Otherwise, they would have kept fighting until every single man was dead.

Need an example? Just look at what they did to the Chinese. Sickening.

[Rukentuts]

The swedish used to burn and pillage villages. The dutch practically invented slavery in Europe. The spanish came up with the Inquisition. The germans contributed to the history of humanity with 2 world wars.

Shall I go on ?! Ugly stuff that happened at some points in history does not characterize a country's people nor does make something OK just because "they did it too".

Precisely my point. Pretty much every developed nation has a history of atrocity. Acting holier than thou because one can cite another nation's atrocities is absolutely ludicrous, and frankly quite hypocritical.

[Grizzly Willy]

The swedish used to burn and pillage villages. The dutch practically invented slavery in Europe. The spanish came up with the Inquisition. The germans contributed to the history of humanity with 2 world wars.

Shall I go on ?! Ugly stuff that happened at some points in history does not characterize a country's people nor does make something OK just because "they did it too".

I think the point is that this idea of bashing a country for the shit they did and acting like your country is somehow better - and I fully acknowledge that my country has committed some heinous acts - doesn't really work when when your country has committed atrocities as well.

[Slammin Shaman]

We just need to take Assad and push him somewhere else. Preferably off a cliff.

[Deleted]

We just need to take Assad and push him somewhere else. Preferably off a cliff.

Not that easy when Putin says "Leave Assad alone! Leave him alone! You don't know what he's been through" with tears in his eyes.

[Adam Jensen]

Why are Americans so interested anyway?
Waaaaaaaaaa chemical weapons are so bad waahhhhhhhhh
-DROPS AGENT ORANGE ON VIETNAM.... DROPS TWO NUKES ON JAPAN-

MERICA.


Infracted.

Don't troll.

One of those events is 40 years ago. The other, nearly 70. The nuking of Japan was, by most historians, the fastest and ironically least deadly way to end the war. Agent Orange was a bad decision and a warcrime and most Americans admit this.

[Spectral]

We just need to take Assad and push him somewhere else. Preferably off a cliff.

I'm sure the caliph wannabes that take over will be an absolute delight.

[Adam Jensen]

And the UK had no clue what those gases would do?

We could keep this up all day. The truth is the USA isn't the only country to have used WMDs, and it is hardly the last. You can stop this "holier than thou" routine now.

Clearly because America committed atrocities in its past (and Europe is perfectly innocent of all crimes) all Americans are, by default, terrible people.

You know, just like everyone in Germany is stil guilty of what the Nazis did.

And yes, this post is sarcastic.

[Rennadrel]

Oh for fuck sake please dont... yet another fully fledged war will happen and everyone will have to get involved. Hopefully the UN steps in and fixes this problem.

The UN has shown their only consistent is doing nothing. They are a useless organization organized by a bunch of suits too chicken shit to act when war crimes actually happen. If they were going to do anything, the ideal time would have been when this whole ordeal started almost 2 years ago. So yeah, the UN are a bunch of pansies, anyone with stones would have dropped bombs on Syrian government buildings 20 months ago and ended Al'Assad's reign of terror for good.

[Sunseeker]

If the world is so concerned, lets see them help. We don't need any more wars, we don't want any more wars. Not to mention wars in a country where we have no idea what the endgame of the rebels are. We all can see what's happening in Egypt, we don't need another one of those in Syria, even if Assad is a horrible person and uses chemical weapons, he will be a king of nothing.

[N-7]

Precisely my point. Pretty much every developed nation has a history of atrocity. Acting holier than thou because one can cite another nation's atrocities is absolutely ludicrous, and frankly quite hypocritical.

It is just that some take pride on their atrocities while others recognise them as "mistakes".

[Sunseeker]

It is just that some take pride on their atrocities while others recognise them as "mistakes".

Taking pride in something and admitting it was a mistake are not mutually exclusive. And what a "mistake" amounts to it largely opinion-based.

[Grizzly Willy]

If the world is so concerned, lets see them help. We don't need any more wars, we don't want any more wars. Not to mention wars in a country where we have no idea what the endgame of the rebels are. We all can see what's happening in Egypt, we don't need another one of those in Syria, even if Assad is a horrible person and uses chemical weapons, he will be a king of nothing.

Not to mention that we really shouldn't be spending more money on more wars.

[Sunseeker]

Not to mention that we really shouldn't be spending more money on more wars.

War sucks, but it is sometimes necessary. If there was a dire need for war, then that need would be clear and present and I suspect most people would support the need to fight. This is not a dire need for war, what is going on is neither clear nor present.

[Kraenen]

Meh, the United States still shouldn't get involved in it. It's not our war to begin with, and it's not like we've never turned a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons before. Let the UN or some other nation go play world police and fix this.

Why shouldn't the US help out?

[Grizzly Willy]

War sucks, but it is sometimes necessary. If there was a dire need for war, then that need would be clear and present and I suspect most people would support the need to fight. This is not a dire need for war, what is going on is neither clear nor present.

Whether or not it's necessary is a different issue, I feel. Perhaps I should have said that it's something we probably can't afford.

[Sunseeker]

Whether or not it's necessary is a different issue, I feel. Perhaps I should have said that it's something we probably can't afford.

Not at the time, certainly not. Wars of attrition where the whole country goes into battle-mode can be afforded simply because of how that works. These "police actions" are stupid expensive otherwise.