This isn’t our problem. We need to stay out of it.
Well, good news of some kind, at least - the British Parliament has voted against military intervention (on their part, of course) in Syria.
[QUOTE=NPR.org]
“It is clear to me the British Parliament, reflecting the views of the British people, does not want to see British military action,” Prime Minister David Cameron said. “I get that and the government will act accordingly.”
[/QUOTE]
Here’s the full NPR print story (along with their new format, which includes a gigantic useless photo of the parliament building).
This might slow down US involvement a little. One can only hope that the rest of the world, and even (who knows?) our own legislature will be similarly sane.
Roddy
That’s the real question here - everyone in the world (or close enough for government work) knows that Assad gassed his own people, including non-combatants and women and children; what should the rest of the world do about it? Syria is a sovereign nation, and they are having a civil war; what role should the rest of the world play in their internal strife?
What similar situation? Saddam Hussein was not known to have gassed anyone since the 80s, and no WMDs could even be found. There was no mass movement against him, no “red line” to cross and he had been fairly quiet for some time.
In Syria you have the recent use of chemical weapons with no reason to believe they won’t be used again. You have a large part of the country against Assad, and there was a huge mess there long before the slightest murmur of Western intervention.
Fair enough. But NB: I referred to only 9% of Americans currently as warmongers and I stand by what I said; cite provided. Hopefully, as opposed to '03, I won’t have to reappraise what I wrote when the bombs start pouring down as in Iraq…when it all becomes USA! USA! USA! and waving flags everywhere.
Anyway, I am not fighting you – I am fighting your nation’s absurdly aggressive policies; nothing exceptional mind you, just like any other empire. I just turned 57 and I can’t remember, in that time, the US NOT being in one conflict or another. Can you, in you time? Do tell.
In short, are you included? If not, no worries, right? Because I actually praised the rest (91%!! good on them) for not choosing McCain/Palin. Can’t imagine we wouldn’t be in W-III by now if that was the case. Just expected much better from your current POTUS and his views on the future. Never mind his influences & actions in making his visions valid.
Empty suit.
Thank you. I am a bit behind the news cycle, so yes, indeed, that is excellent news. Looks like most of your representatives have learned something from Iraq. And like you, I hope some other US puppets have too.
Actually, not quite so sure. After Obama set the “red-line” the insurgents knew exactly what they had to do to get the US actively involved – never mind supplying them with weapons, they just had to have Assad cross the mythical red line. Does that make you in any way suspect of current US Intel…rather like Saddam’s infamous WMDs? President and his acolytes said it, who am I to disagree?
As to how they might have gotten CWs, Libya was a free-for-all in terms of getting them and moving them elsewhere. Besides the fact that a quick search teaches you how to make some of them by simply going to a pharmacy. Industrial grade? Likely not – but you can always capture them from the other side.
Finally, why are chem weapons any different than conventional ones? A 2,000 lbs “guided missile” can cause the same or worse damage.
Ever hear about the MOAB? Short of going nuclear there is nothing as deadly.
Except we factually don’t know that indeed it was Assad that used them. As for Saddam, forget it. It was a foregone conclusion in the prior administration that he had to go. Never mind what lies were said. Mine how quickly they are forgotten: The Project for the New American Century
But you find no parallels in that?
As for ‘support’ what is a “large part of the country”? Perhaps you’ve been duped?
Most Syrians back President Assad, but you’d never know from western media
Be well.
Well, it would help quite a bit if the UN inspection team in Syria attempting to determine the chemical weapon used also would address its probable source, but apparently that’s not going to happen. I suppose if they came out saying “the rebels did it” the US might still mount an attack but I’m not really seeing it.
Meanwhile, it is indeed frustrating to see that, if so many people here supposedly are against military intervention, how come no one, no one at all, is out on the street yelling about it? It’s like the whole country has gone catatonic.
Pure speculation here, but likely reasons are twofold: 1) no one (I’m guessing) seriously thinks this is likely to involve more than a few days’ airborne attacks with mainly standoff weapons, 2) and therefore nothing, in the short term at least, about this is going to affect our lives here. As long as we don’t think too much about it.
As for Obama, what can I say? I voted for the guy; so I guess I own what I perceive as the coming gross misdeed.
+100
Yes, yes indeed, bothers the hell out of me whether on this forum or in real life it seems that Dems are giving Obama a green light for everything he does – and I speak only to his foreign policy. What he does in the US is no concern of mine. Up to all of you to decide as long as it doesn’t mess-up my world. Unfortunately, being such a homogeneous empire, almost anything you do affects me and/or most other free nations under your orders either directly or indirectly. Or else.
Other than that, nothing to add, except that I’d wish your post gets a ton of hits – and makes people pause and think about serious events; the probability of blow-back on this one should make everyone at least think about it. Which is exactly what I’ve been saying in essence.
As for Obama, I would have done the same thing were I an American, as my only son is and did – he worked very hard as a volunteer the first time around, voted yet again for him his second time around but is as thoroughly disillusioned as are many/most of his generation. So like you, he really had no choice; no time for regrets or partisanship. STM, the US has become a one Party system anyway.
But wake-up people! Global annihilation is not just a movie script.
Be well.
Same as with other civil wars - supply weapons to factions you like, publish condemnations of the factions you don’t like, and, if a regional organization of which the country is a member gets its act together, send some of its troops in for some ineffectual “peacemaking”.
Jesus. Everybody’s so fucking serious. What about the traders? Who’s shedding any tears for them, huh? I had money in SCO figuring oil was a sure short from $107. And it was looking good for like a whole day, but somehow, somebody in the Middleast always manages to find another 1lb bag stuffed with 2lbs of shit to toss into the fan. All I can say is praise the lord for trailing stops.
First it was cheese-eating surrender monkeys, now it’s cream tea-eating surrender monkeys: Old Europe, what can you do.
I think the world is suffering from War Fatigue right now - my gut reaction to even thinking about another Afghanistan/Iraq is, “Oh, God, another one? We’re not even finished cleaning up all the mess from the last wars and the economic meltdown and all the other shit that’s going on in the world!”
I, too, wait for the day when America will finally export food and technology.
To follow precedent shouldn’t English Muffins now be called Freedom Muffins?
I don’t think there’s a realistic possibility of any good coming any US military action. I don’t recall much official moral outrage when our then ally Saddam Hussein gassed a few thousand Kurds.
We should just apologize for the last hundred years of foreign policy blunders and admit we are neither wise nor prosperous enough to play the world’s sheriff.
Obama committed the US when he dared Assad to use chemical weapons in the first place - which is what he essentially did by saying several months ago that the US would respond if he did. So he did and now the US doesn’t really have any choice unless it wants to have any future jawboning to have virtually no impact.
I’m always puzzled by people’s reactions to things like this. On the one hand you get the righteous indignation that nothing is done about atrocities unless oil or some other strategic interest is involved and on the other, if action is taken, you get people bitching about either soldiers being put in harm’s way or about civilian casualties. It’s almost as if they seem to think the world should be all rainbows and unicorns.
News outlets are reporting the President will be making a statement at 1:15 EST, so about 10 minutes from now. I’m guessing he will be announcing an attack is in progress or imminent.
This just going to be a mess no matter what happens. I mean that domestically as well as internationally.
I’m not sure what this has to do with how much opposition Obama should be facing.
According to the article you posted, 55% want Assad to remain in power. That doesn’t necessarily mean 45% want him to go, but it certainly doesn’t refute the notion that a large part of Syria is against Assad. It is, perhaps, good reason to not support the rebels, but even if 99.9% supported him and he gassed the 0.1%, the use of chemical weapons itself is worth at least addressing, and certainly distinguishes him from the Saddam Hussein of 2003.
You truly are an utter idiot. And an asshole. Did I mention you’re a moron?
The only thing worse than the stereotypical ‘Ugly American’ are Eurosnobs like you.
I think you should really apologize to Eurosnobs for that remark. 
You’re right. Eurosnobs, I apologize. RedFury is far worse than you guys.