You can either look like the spoiled rich kid that helps no one or the guy who tries to impose himself on everyone else. In both scenarios, everyone hates you, but the former is better for your economy.
You're getting exactly what you deserve.
Interesting that you brought this up.
The justice and law is that, international military action should be under UN security authorization.
U.S = United States =/= United Nations. U.S. law is valid in US, and it is government is responsible for that within its own territory, not in foreign countries. International action like this without UN authorization is breaking the law and justice itself.
US role is not international police, but another international citizen obeying international law.
Last edited by ashblond; 2013-09-09 at 12:51 AM.
Shortsighted US cowboys with a 6month ADHD timespan and a bunch of EU compromising rednecks on one side - lunatics on the other side.
Nothing good will come out of this and yes I'm presume this is if the Assad regime is accountable.
But soon after Mr Xi secured a third term, Apple released a new version of the feature in China, limiting its scope. Now Chinese users of iPhones and other Apple devices are restricted to a 10-minute window when receiving files from people who are not listed as a contact. After 10 minutes, users can only receive files from contacts.
Apple did not explain why the update was first introduced in China, but over the years, the tech giant has been criticised for appeasing Beijing.
America should keep there fingers out of it. I am sorry but its none of there business. The Arab league should be the ones dealing with it because its in there area.
Aye mate
But soon after Mr Xi secured a third term, Apple released a new version of the feature in China, limiting its scope. Now Chinese users of iPhones and other Apple devices are restricted to a 10-minute window when receiving files from people who are not listed as a contact. After 10 minutes, users can only receive files from contacts.
Apple did not explain why the update was first introduced in China, but over the years, the tech giant has been criticised for appeasing Beijing.
Why is it the responsibility of the United States to get involved in another nation's civil war? We're broke, we got out of Iraq not too long ago, and now you want to get involved in another war? When is enough enough? Are we suppossed to keep intervening until the nation is completely bankrupt? Do you honestly think we can continue doing this until world peace exists? That's not a realistic train of thought grounded in reality.
It has nothing to do with Al Qaeda (who was created by the U.S. in the first place) so much as it has to do with getting involved in a foreign nation's civil war. Might I add that China and Russia are also patrolling the area with warships, this could very well lead to World War 3. It disgusts me how many sheltered people on these forums blindly support war, but wouldn't want to be on the front lines themselves. It's like diplomacy isn't even an option anymore.
FYI, if you're talking about how the world looks at us, btw, I imagine we'd be looked at as a nation that actually follows its rule of law if congress votes down a war resolution reflecting the will of the people.
Also, the line about Al Qaeda having a change of heart, that's cute. You should look at history from even the last 20 years and see how well that's worked out.
We need to bomb Syria.... to see what's in it.
-Nancy Pelosi
Free-To-Play is the future.
Personally I think we should draw the line at offering humanitarian aid along with fellow allies. If it comes to the point that there are refugees that need to get out of there for a while, then help them.
Honestly it's insulting that many are against money going into programs and junk to help our own citizens, but throw it into some other country, in a good or bad way, sure why not.