Syria
- Started
- Last post
- 253 Responses
- colin_s0
what's unfortunate is the idea of what intervention means in this day and age. due to the united states' (legitimately) tarnished reputation as a world leader in humanitarian efforts and the spreading of democracy etc etc., problems like syria become a notion of "how many more times must this happen?"
had the US not actually gone through with the bullshit wars of the past 10 years, i think the world would be a lot more open to a coalition stopping the genocidal mania of a madman against his own civilians. but now it becomes this international debate on politics, when really it should be governed by just the idea these people are dying of chemical weapons for no reason, and this asshole needs to be stopped.
however, because of haliburton & co, because of the indifference to humanity that capitalism binges on and the world trade that hangs in the balance, we're left debating among ourselves the likelihood and measurability of military action instead of just doing the right thing.
it's not that war is ever good, but we must recognize war is already happening, and a military intervention is all that will stop it. this man will only stop with death.
the US has surely fucked itself from here on out, and though it started with reagan, w bush will certainly be recognized as the one who fulfilled the demise of it all.
- GeorgesIV0
Colin, why do you keep spewing this mainstream bs,
his country is under attack by terrorist and he's a madmen, I don't get why us the west keep on ignoring the majority of syrian that support assad,I've read account from christians, jews, muslims who live in syria and totally support assad, they know what is around the corner for them is they ever lose the grip on their country, why should we ignore them and believe those who lie continuoulsy,
is he a madman from defending his country from terrorists? do you wish to see syria go the way iraq, libya and egypt are going, do you even know how life is in those country? do you care,"had the US not actually gone through with the bullshit wars of the past 10 years," are you fuckn kidding me, did you forget the 50 odd years of US incursion and destabilisation around the world, or did you just wake up 10 years ago?
I ask you ""how many more times must this happen?" that the US and it's all_lies, go into a country and set it back to the stone age,
- GeorgesIV0
Attacking Syria is about saving face, not saving lives
There is no such thing as a "surgical strike", and we must assume that civilians may be killed in any airstrikes."Why should military action be necessitated by outrage over chemical attacks? Was there a red line on chemical weapons when the US used depleted-uranium ammunition in Fallujah, Iraq? Was there a red line when Israel deployed white phosphorous in Gaza in 2008? Or when Saddam Hussein, then a western ally, gassed the Iranians and then his own people during the 1980s? This arbitrary and self-serving declaration of what's acceptable is precisely what makes the US so lacking in credibility when it comes to preaching codes of warfare to the Middle East. "
- GeorgesIV0
my antiwar bias must be showing
-
Lapdog media learns nothing, beats war drums again
Have we forgotten Judith Miller already? Or Colin Powell at the U.N.? Before attacking Syria, let's know the truthMake that tragically similar. History proceeds, we Americans insist on the virtue of ignorance, on learning nothing and knowing nothing. And what we are about to get is what we get, predictably and always. We are a singular people, no question. Maybe even exceptional.
As of these hours, the Obama administration is on the record as rejecting any deliberations the U.N. may judge just. On Wednesday evening, British Prime Minister David Cameron gave in to Labour Party objections to his support for Washington’s invasion plans. Britain now wants to see a U.N. report on the alleged chemical attacks from weapons instructors, and to give the Security Council process more time.
But listen closely to President Obama speaking Wednesday on PBS’ “Newshour” and it is clear the U.S. could go it alone against the Syrian regime if need be. “We’re prepared to work with anybody – the Russians and others – to try to bring the parties together to resolve the conflict,” Obama said. “But we want the Assad regime to understand that by using chemical weapons on a large scale against your own people ... you’re also creating a situation where U.S. national interests are affected, and that needs to stop.”
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/29/…
- yurimon0
so according to NYT
"WASHINGTON — The goal of the cruise missile strikes the United States is planning to carry out in Syria is to restore the smudged “red line”There is a red line that was blurred. It might have rained or something and a line became blurry like chalk on a side walk.
So the strike was necessary to paint the red line back on. dont worry guys. cause missiles work like markers, see. I didnt know that till now.
- jasontroj0
I want to take this time to thank England for thinking rationally and backing out of "The Coalition."
Since 80% of our population here doesn't back a strike, maybe it will take an outside vote like that one to tell our president to knock it off.
This is all rogue "I'm Commander in Chief" shit. There are talks about going around Congress, because theirs a good chance they too would block this.
- 91% of Americans don't back the strike either.monospaced
- It's up to 91% now?
Even crazier!jasontroj - they're gonna do it regardlessAl_dizzle
- makes you wonder where democracy really comes into playmonospaced
- Ahem, Scotland, Ireland and Wales was part of this too. There's more to the UK than England.seeessess
- I thought England = LondonMaaku
- Merica = eejitsseeessess
- I'm not american :)Maaku
- How they voted:
http://news.bbcimg.c…goldieboy - Conservatives were totally up for itgoldieboy
- Stability in the region for economic benefit! Pipelinezzzzzz.nb
- GeorgesIV0
the price of freedom
(warning: horrible)
- Beeswax0
Is there anybody here who doesn't know that the rebel AL-Nusra fighters are backed by the US since the beginning to topple down Esad and that they are tied with Al Qaida?
So over 100.000 people are actually killed by terrorists supported by the US ARMY. (you wouldn't expect Esad sitting on his back and watching his country being taken over by Emperialist terorists right?)So simply US + Al Qaida against Syria.
Initiator of violence = US + Al Nusra
Cost of violence = 100.000 civiliansReason: Cause this will make any attack at Iran possible and easier.
- This. It has nothing to do with helping the people of Syria. It's all about Iran. Has been for years.Sep
- utopian0
"Amerika needs another war like it needs another black president"
- Fox News
- GeorgesIV0
it's becoming ridiculous now,
are we supposed to go for war for some "alledged" facebook rant from a 11 yo kid, btw if this is legit and I doubt it, he's quite fluent with the language and structure of the english language,
good for him,
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com…- http://cdn0.salon.io…ApeRobot
- http://i.imgur.com/K…utopian
- what is this shitdbloc
- if true, pretty ironic that he is posting it on what these filthy infidels call "facebook"inv
- Well i's NY tImes, the pro israel pro war, assholes who have liberal masksBeeswax
- the kid is 12 and about to get his college degree.sea_sea
- pr20
Georges, although i applaud your efforts to enlighten some of the simple minded folks on this forum about the reality of war and any conflict, make sure not to automatically label the opposition fighters terrorists as many of them are not.
This particular conflict is extremely complicated (in all honesty all conflicts are but we do like to have "black and white" stories to tell).
Here is an interesting doc from the source:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/fr…
- formed0
The administration is painting this as a "we are sending a clear message that we will not tolerate chemical weapons AND we are protecting US interests in the area".
I've not actually heard that we are going there for humanitarian reasons.
Surprisingly, 50% is in support of attacking. I thought it'd be much lower, but I guess the "surgical strike" that doesn't involve boots on the ground sounds a little better, even though that's how every mess starts.
- they don't want us to know the reason behind this war. There is money and power somewhere that they want.capn_ron
- I've read pretty much everywhere that it's to stop the tyrant from causing more bloodshed and killing innocents, that pretty much humanitarian,GeorgesIV
- now as of the interrest? is this israel you're talking about?GeorgesIV
- twooh0
Pretty tough to watch
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-…
- monkeyshine0
So, we're going to bomb them because 1400 people, 426 of whom are children but what about the 100k or 5k-6k children who have been killed since the start of the civil war? Why didn't we beat our chests in 2011 when Assad brutally killed so many people for protesting? You can kill them with bullets, just not chemical weapons?
- pr20
Syrian regime supports Hezbollah.
Hezbollah promises to wipe Israel off the map.
USA loves Israel.
Israel wants USA to destroy the supporter of Hezbollah (Syrian regime).Once again USA is stick doing Israels dirty laundry.