Syria: US Involvement

What do you all think about Syrian conflict in regards to US involvement?

Should we be working towards diplomatic resolution? Is that possible? What does it say that the US is poised to launch missiles?

Connor Lidell wrote: What do you all think about Syrian conflict in regards to US involvement?

Should we be working towards diplomatic resolution? Is that possible? What does it say that the US is poised to launch missiles?

I can't say much about this, because to be honest I do not watch or read world news. I don't have the desire to feed into the propaganda that the world is a horrible place filled with violence and conflict, and little else.

Diplomatic resolution is always possible, its just a matter of figuring out if the people negotiating are serious about finding a diplomatic resolution, and what they are willing to do to reach such a resolution. For some, it is easier to result to conflict rather than give something up, even if it is only their pride.

Again, being that I don't watch or read the news, I wouldn't understand the reasons why the US is poised to launch missiles. Unless the country is under direct provocation however, its in my view a preemptive measure at asserting dominance and control over a foreign political situation.

Hopefully that made sense.

A show of strength is part of diplomatic resolution...

Although it can be seen as bullying too....

I don't care how big the guy is on the other side of the issue... I will stand my ground until I am convinced im wrong... lol...

Should we be working towards diplomatic resolution

Yes

What does it say that the US is poised to launch missiles?

We are looking like a bully.


The US is not the words police force.

You'd like it to not be the world's police force. But, track records show our vigilanteous efforts are not unrecorded in the history books.

And yet, police are known for being corrupt, using their given authority for their own agendas, planting situations involving criminals or criminal activity to shape a scenario to their benefit... for which the US has that very same history of doing.

Connor Lidell wrote: You'd like it to not be the world's police force. But, track records show our vigilanteous efforts are not unrecorded in the history books.

Are you saying the US should be the worlds police force?

Anytime you have “power” involved in anything, politics and corruption have the ability to run rampant.

I am not excusing the behavior only pointing out that this is nothing new. Be aware of it and don’t be shocked when you see something “bad” happen. People are only people and greed is almost as powerful a motivator as fear.

Two people that always argue with one another are at it again. One day, you spot one walking across his yard with a baseball bat and an angry expression. The three of you live where there is no one else that can intervene. Do you set by and watch the chaos ensue or do you step up and try to stop it?

If you act, people point and say that you are a bully and overstepping your bounds. If you do not act then you are accused of being part of the problem because you stand idly by and watch.

If you act, people point and say that you are a bully and overstepping your bounds

It all depends on where why how. Acting by supplying rebels with weapons is bound to piss some people off. Acting by shooting freedom fighters is bound to piss some people off. And obviously, there's the whole classification thing going on. There' absolutely no difference between the rebel and the freedom fighter, yet simply choosing one word over the other will define who you're pissing off. This will in turn shape future conflicts, even alter the economic balances in large areas. My question is: who's in charge of classifying ?

All the more reason to MYOB.