Syrian Government Ready To Use Chemical Weapons

[Wiyld]

that kind of thought process gets the human race as it stands, no where. Theres a better solution that i hope we can get to before this happens.

We are no where? What does that even mean?

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

We are no where? What does that even mean?

He's saying that thought process gets the human race nowhere. As in, no progress.

[dim]

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.

hehe....good one

UN to solve a conflict, that would be the day.....if there is one world institution that really shouldnt get involved into wars that is UN army. Actually they are even kinda dangerous, cuz people get this feeling they are safe under UN protection and they really are not. UN is political organisation, for every bullet they fire they prolly need to ask first. Anyone who lives in Balkan area knows how "helpful" UN is. They should stick to humanitarian things, they cant fuk up things there.....too much.

even thou i dont think US should involve themselves in every conflict in the world, cuz sometimes its just not their business. Ok, almost always its not their business. But when there is needed military action in a world with a good reason, then i would like NATO to take charge of it with US taking the helm.

tbh, i would really like to see Russia and China in action in those situations....but it seems they mostly just talk alot and do nothing.

[Wiyld]

tbh, i would really like to see Russia and China in action in those situations....but it seems they mostly just talk alot and do nothing.

Unfortunately when the US is pissed about something and threatens to use military force we tend to find out the Chinese and Russians are working behind the scenes supporting the folks we are mad at. So not only are they not helping they are in most cases hurting. The Chinese are on a MEGA military binge at the moment. They want to get their hands on every piece of US tech they can, they've been stealing our designs for years and have spent a crazy amount of money modernizing their military. They even have that aircraft carrier and stealth fighter they are working on now as well as drones. They are literally building a military customized to take out the US military. For example, before they invested in a carrier of their own, they spent a lot of time developing a missile that would take out our Carriers quickly and easily.

[Deadvolcanoes]

I'm saying that I have no desire to spend our resources on dealing with a problem that doesn't tangibly effect us.

I'm not completely convinced that our inaction in this particular situation wouldn't come back to bite us in the long run. I could imagine a number of scenarios where giving aid to the Syrian Rebels directly helps our nation, or where failing to act directly damages our nation. Otherwise I would be inclined to agree.

[Spectral]

I'm not completely convinced that our inaction in this particular situation wouldn't come back to bite us in the long run. I could imagine a number of scenarios where giving aid to the Syrian Rebels directly helps our nation, or where failing to act directly damages our nation. Otherwise I would be inclined to agree.

I'm not convinced that action wouldn't bite us later. We don't have the best track record of determining who the "good guys" are, and I'm actually fairly sure there isn't a good guy in Syria. Keep in mind, the rebels are Islamist extremists.

[Deadvolcanoes]

I'm not convinced that action wouldn't bite us later. We don't have the best track record of determining who the "good guys" are, and I'm actually fairly sure there isn't a good guy in Syria. Keep in mind, the rebels are Islamist extremists.

That's a fair point. Guess were damned if we do, damned if we don't.

[Wiyld]

I'm not convinced that action wouldn't bite us later. We don't have the best track record of determining who the "good guys" are, and I'm actually fairly sure there isn't a good guy in Syria. Keep in mind, the rebels are Islamist extremists.

Yeah, this.

While the immediate threat of chemical weapons use is concerning, the fact is that neither side likes us much, they are just willing to be nice for a year or two in exchange for weapons.

I mean look at all the killings of coalition soldiers by insiders in Afghanistan. Hell do we really need to bring up the fact that AQ was funded and armed by the US?

Just look at Egypt, we were all 'yay they had a revolution and now the Egyptians can be free!!" and now we're all 'oh no...the new guys are as bad as the old guys...again'.

[TheGravemind]

If they begin gassing their own people, I'm going to enlist tomorrow (in University atm, was going to do OCS afterwards anyway) and I'm hoping for a strong unilateral response from the U.S.A. I will not stand for another genocide, not to mention that this also puts Israel at risk.

It's time we put an end to evil dogs.

---------- Post added 2012-12-06 at 05:51 AM ----------

Google the Halabja gas attack (Google images.)

That's what Saddam did in 1 Sarin gas attack.

Now imagine that's your family.

Now do you selfish imbeciles understand? Will you only act when its YOUR family being targeted? I hope humanity evolves past this because I tired of selfish (expletive)s.

[Wiyld]

If they begin gassing their own people, I'm going to enlist tomorrow (in University atm, was going to do OCS afterwards anyway) and I'm hoping for a strong unilateral response from the U.S.A. I will not stand for another genocide, not to mention that this also puts Israel at risk.

It's time we put an end to evil dogs.

/facepalm

I'm sorry but that's just about the most naive thing I've ever heard.

You won't stand for another genocide? Like personally YOU won't allow it? Lol ok? Where were you when all the other modern genocides were happening? Or are you only interested in ones that get a lot of media attention?

[Vuljatar]

The problem is, the US doesn't WANT the UN to do anything, not really.

Heres the issue. If the UN asserts itself, and is wildly successful without it being VERY clear that it was basically US money and material dressed in UN colors, then it gains more legitimacy. Just listen to the people here in the thread, who actually takes the UN seriously until the US steps in and says 'yeah we agree with the UN'. Even if its just the US rep to the UN saying it, the fact is the UN simply doesn't have a whole ton of sway without US inclusion in its threats. Now, if the UN begins to prove itself without such significant US backing, well then the US now has a potential rival. Those of us in the Us have never been big fans of world government, which is what the UN is in a limited sense. We never backed the League of Nations, a move that led to its demise. We make a big show of liking the idea of the UN but ultimately we don't feel its in our best interest to see a really strong UN.

I'm no fan of the UN and certainly not at all in favor of world government, but this sort of thing strikes me as the exact situation that actually SHOULD be handled by the UN.

If they begin gassing their own people, I'm going to enlist tomorrow (in University atm, was going to do OCS afterwards anyway) and I'm hoping for a strong unilateral response from the U.S.A. I will not stand for another genocide, not to mention that this also puts Israel at risk.

It's time we put an end to evil dogs.

---------- Post added 2012-12-06 at 05:51 AM ----------

Google the Halabja gas attack (Google images.)

That's what Saddam did in 1 Sarin gas attack.

Now imagine that's your family.

Now do you selfish imbeciles understand? Will you only act when its YOUR family being targeted? I hope humanity evolves past this because I tired of selfish (expletive)s.

Your outrage burns hot and emotional. Think logically. Consider what we gain from another war in another country in the middle-east, and consider what we lose. Consider all the effort, money, and lives spent in the middle-east over the past decade and try to imagine what could have been accomplished here in the United States with that sort of money and manpower.

[Darkrulerxxx]

If they begin gassing their own people, I'm going to enlist tomorrow (in University atm, was going to do OCS afterwards anyway) and I'm hoping for a strong unilateral response from the U.S.A. I will not stand for another genocide, not to mention that this also puts Israel at risk.

It's time we put an end to evil dogs.

---------- Post added 2012-12-06 at 05:51 AM ----------

Google the Halabja gas attack (Google images.)

That's what Saddam did in 1 Sarin gas attack.

Now imagine that's your family.

Now do you selfish imbeciles understand? Will you only act when its YOUR family being targeted? I hope humanity evolves past this because I tired of selfish (expletive)s.

i agree, its a tough cookie but someone has to do the job, no matter how many countries hate us for it, in the end we are doing good by getting rid of evil. The UN's a joke to have any hope for them doing any sort of action. We as humans have a prerogative for the progression and evolution of our species. By standing by and hoping for someone else to do it does as much as harm as anything else. If America or any other country has the power to get rid of evil, then do it. Let our country lead by example and others will step up to the plate...hopefully, if not, Then let the US do what is has been doing this past century.

[TheGravemind]

/facepalm

I'm sorry but that's just about the most naive thing I've ever heard.

You won't stand for another genocide? Like personally YOU won't allow it? Lol ok? Where were you when all the other modern genocides were happening? Or are you only interested in ones that get a lot of media attention?

Darfur hasn't escalated in a while. Tibet isn't really a genocide, but some may construe it as such. There's one occurring in Myanmar, but it's not a very military conflict and we're not in a great position to intervene.

In Syria, however, more people have died than in any other pending genocide, we have an impetus for intervening, we have the force projection, and we are morally obligated to (from my moral paradigm at least) stop another dead mother cradling her dead child due to a Sarin gas attack.

I'm sorry that you think it's naive to strive for justice.

[Wiyld]

i agree, its a tough cookie but someone has to do the job, no matter how many countries hate us for it, in the end we are doing good by getting rid of evil. The UN's a joke to have any hope for them doing any sort of action. We as humans have a prerogative for the progression and evolution of our species. By standing by and hoping for someone else to do it does as much as harm as anything else. If America or any other country has the power to get rid of evil, then do it. Let our country lead by example and others will step up to the plate...hopefully, if not, Then let the US do what is has been doing this past century.

Who are you to decide which side is evil?

Neither has used chemical weapons yet, both sides have killed many many people.

[TheGravemind]

i agree, its a tough cookie but someone has to do the job, no matter how many countries hate us for it, in the end we are doing good by getting rid of evil. The UN's a joke to have any hope for them doing any sort of action. We as humans have a prerogative for the progression and evolution of our species. By standing by and hoping for someone else to do it does as much as harm as anything else. If America or any other country has the power to get rid of evil, then do it. Let our country lead by example and others will step up to the plate...hopefully, if not, Then let the US do what is has been doing this past century.

I have personally met with Iraqis (including those who came to the U.S. due to successful asylum requests) who state that while there is disdain for the United States in the region, that view began changing in 2007. The United States' work is appreciated on the street, and regardless of what even the entire world thinks of what we do, if we always do what is right, we will be done right. In addition, look at how many friends we made in Libya when we intervened. Libya has the highest American regime approval ratings in the entire Muslim world after our liberation of it.

Iraq, especially Baghdad, had pro-American sentiments when we initially intervened. Those faded when we stayed past 6 months, however.

Preventing innocent people from being obliterated is a cause worth fighting for. you with me, g?

[Wiyld]

Darfur hasn't escalated in a while. Tibet isn't really a genocide, but some may construe it as such. There's one occurring in Myanmar, but it's not a very military conflict and we're not in a great position to intervene.

In Syria, however, more people have died than in any other pending genocide, we have an impetus for intervening, we have the force projection, and we are morally obligated to (from my moral paradigm at least) stop another dead mother cradling her dead child due to a Sarin gas attack.

I'm sorry that you think it's naive to strive for justice.

Even if that means supporting and putting into power a group who would take away all rights from said mother and treat her like a dog?

I mean.. you do realize you are supporting a group that wants to topple the pro western, non religious government that we have supported in exchange for a conservative Muslim one...right? Anyone heard of Iran?

[PACOX]

Time get prepared for a bunch of non-US citizens expecting us to do something and then shitting all over us when we do.

[TheGravemind]

Who are you to decide which side is evil?

Neither has used chemical weapons yet, both sides have killed many many people.

Assad's regime engages in systematic gang raping, targets innocent people (primarily Sunnis) to terrorize the local populace, bombs funerals, bombs hospitals, and is about to embark upon another mass-killing of its people via Sarin gas and other biological/chemical weapons.

The rebels are angels compared to the regime. I'm not myopic or naive, it's objective analysis. The rebels are a BETTER ALTERNATIVE for EVERYONE other than Assad's regime itself. I am tired of seeing his stuck-up neo-bourgeois family parading around on looted money from his country while he kills his own people behind the scenes, from little kids to the elderly.

---------- Post added 2012-12-06 at 06:04 AM ----------

Even if that means supporting and putting into power a group who would take away all rights from said mother and treat her like a dog?

1. There are no groups who would do that in Syria, not even the Salafists.
2. Radical groups in Syria are small and engaged in Alliances of convenience with the rebels.
3. Syria has had a history of pluralism and it's time people who are not familiar with the region realize that not all Arab states are alike. Saudi Arabia is nothing like Lebanon which is nothing like Jordan, for example.

[Vuljatar]

Preventing innocent people from being obliterated is a cause worth fighting for. you with me, g?

Generally I am, but there are a lot of causes worth fighting for, and many of them are at home and actually help the people who pay the tax money who make said fighting possible.

I'm not saying "we shouldn't help them", I'm saying that we need to get our priorities straight. There are a LOT of things that are currently more worthy of our time and money.

[Darkrulerxxx]

Who are you to decide which side is evil?

Neither has used chemical weapons yet, both sides have killed many many people.

The mere mention of the possibility of using chemical weapons on their own people is construed as being evil. Look up the Geneva Convention then come back to me.

This isn't a question of what is evil. Because we know Assad Is a worthless dirtbag who wants to kill his own people. The rebels, even though as islamic extremists, are fighting to counter this sort of execution of weaponry and mass destruction. When the time comes we might have to deal with them as well but evil is evil.