In other words, they mean nothing to you?
? Yes they do. So do (thousands!) of dead children in every other ongoing conflict in the world. Yet I wouldn’t involve myself in every ongoing conflict in the world. So - can you tell me your criteria? Why would you intervene in Syria but not Nigeria, for example. Or Central African Republic, for example. I bet you haven’t even heard of the conflict in Central African Republic. Do those victims mean nothing to you?
There’s also a large airbase at Akrotiri on Cyprus that’s in an Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom. Hmmm, that’s not very far from Damascus.
No need to involve Turkey, or depend on carrier-based aircraft. People could go full-strength from Akrotiri. Wonder how busy it has been the past few days?
Syria are your sky’s blue? As I was driving home from my daughter’s home to Aurora, Colorado a 15 minute trip I thought how beautiful the blue sky was, with a just few fluffy clouds. My four year old granddaughter at my side, asleep in her car seat. There was no threat of a bullet being shot at me from a rebel fighter, no drones shooting us, no bombs being dropped on us as we drove home, no fear of chemical weapons. I thought how blessed I am that I can drive with no real fears with a baby in my car. Then I thought are the skies in Syria blue today? I know that there is no feeling of security for the mother’s or grandmother’s there. Now that the United States and the UN might be involved, if they have not already sent in military or CIA, are the mother’s and grandmother’s more fearful. Do they even notice the blue sky? Their conflict has already been so catastrophic for them. I am so sad for them, so sad for the mother’s and grandmothers in Iraq, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Israel, Palestine and especially Syria, impending attacks from a country like the United States and all of their allies. I know that the violence needs to be resolved, and I know I don’t know all of the facts of who is, persecuting whom. But I can imagine what it would be like to be fearful for my grandchildren, my children, be so fearful I could not see the beautiful blue sky above. I know that sending more United States Military forces to yet another location makes me wonder if we actually help the situation. We are a strong country and I believe we should help the rest of the world, but we are so many places, so many deaths, these things cannot be changed. I don’t even know how many countries besides Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Africa, and Egypt that we are in, in combat situations. The fear of losing a child in a conflict because our leaders in all of their wisdom or lack of it, cannot seem to resolve their differences without killing innocent people including the United States Military members who serve their country so bravely. These are age old questions. Unfortunately it usually comes down to money. I can only hope that peace comes soon so that all mother’s and grandmother’s may enjoy the beautiful blue skies above them.
Zero.
If Assad is dead, his wife, family & followers will fight to the death for power.
You might even make it worse, by creating factions.
If the mothers and grandmothers of Syria are fearful today it’s not because of the United States, it’s because the government of their nation used chemical weapons on its own citizens. If they’re fearful it’s not because of what is outside their borders, it is because of what is inside with them.
Lots of dead kids & grandkids there already, with or without us.
Sorry, but that’s true.
Not to this, it isn’t.
Why is there this assumption that the choice is Assad or al-Qaeda? The Al-Nursa front is affiliated with al-Qaeda, but most of the anti-Assad forces aren’t. The Free Syrian Army’s not. The Syrian National Council/Syrian National Coalition, which is the anti-Assad umbrella group, isn’t.
Let’s sodomize and kill the US ambassador and see how Obama responds.
Not necessarily. A runaway nuclear chain reaction is actually difficult to make happen. As I understand it, the immense pressure generated by the detonator on the (enriched) uranium pushes the atoms themselves into close proximity to each other. At any given time a certain number of atoms are splitting or giving off alpha particles or what have you. But this only causes all the atoms around it to split in a chain reaction when the atoms are squeezed unnaturally close together, and then it happens lickety-split to all the fissile atoms.
The radiation/blast from a nuclear bomb might not do it. It would hit your un-compressed fissile material from one direction, more likely scattering it in a dirty-bomb effect than anything. The radiation from a blast hundreds or thousands of meters away won’t be concentrated enough to split every, or even many, uranium atoms in the second bomb. I have to agree with Terr on this one- if you get any secondary nuclear reaction at all, I doubt it would be of the runaway variety.
Because people prefer to imagine there’s only two choices.
Anyway, stop bothering us with the facts.
So while you’re keenly aware of the killing of children around the world, your foreign policy would consists of standing by and watching gleefully while throwing more kindling on the fire.
Henry Kissinger had nothing on you, Terr.
Having observed US politics through the prism of this message baord, I absolutely accept you genuinely believe that.
How things got to quite this degree of intellectual absurdity is another matter.
Syria should break up-it should become about 5 separate staes…one for the Christians, one for the Druse, one for the Alawites, and one each for the Sunni and Shia. That is the only solution. Face it, Versailles (1919) and Sykes-Picot are long dead. Why keep this modern zombie nation called Syria alive? Yugoslavia broke up-why not Syria?
It’s not a terrible idea but Yugoslavia didn’t break up and go to their respective corner all on their own. There was bombing by the US and boots on the ground involvement by NATO. Is that what should happen in Syria? It would have to in order to accomplish what you suggest.
Your policy seems to be that the existence of other atrocities in the world means that our choice must be to intervene in all of them or none of them. Yes there are terrible things going on in Africa. We sat by years ago and let Rwandan genocide occur. You have a valid point that these deaths are no less tragic than those of Syrian children. I make a distinction between Syria and the others is that the Syrian atrocities are being perpetrated by the government of Syria while in other cases different groups of rebels are the murderers. Retaliation is much more effective when the offending party has an army, a president, and a capital.
Comments by the Secretary of State Kerry and others make it sound as if they are aware that the situation in Syria is a clusterfuck that they probably can’t solve, but sort of see that as a second issue next to meting out some kind of justice for the use of WMD’s. Kerry called it “a moral obscenity”, and he has a point, and he spoke of setting an international precedent for violating this “international norm”.
I’m more convinced now that there will be some kind of attack on Assad’s interests. Syria is going to continue to go to hell and I guess they accept that while planning retribution for using the gas.
At the same time, a lot of people are pointing out that there are UN weapons inspectors in Syria right now, and maybe the US ought to wait to hear back from them instead of pulling another W.
Judging US politics based on what people on a message board say is extremely foolish. The Americans on this site are hardly representative of what most Americans think nor for that matter are the citizens of other nations terribly representative.
Beyond that, accusing myself and Bob of somehow being Bush supporters for stating facts, says vastly more about your own ability to analyze the world than ours.
You might as well say I support the IRA because I think the UK has problems with racism against immigrants and Muslims. And no, I hardly think the UK is alone in that regard.