Syria: US Involvement

Pile of non-sense eh?

I'll be sure to tell that to the Kurds that Hussein used his WMD's on.
http://uk.krg.org/genocide/pages/page.aspx?lngnr=12&smap=140000&pnr=42

Non-sense,
I'll pass that along to those who are currently fleeing Darfur
http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/genocide/genocide-in-sudan.htm

The 5,000,000 slaughtered in the Congo,

Libya and Syria are both quickly falling into line.

Many members of the UN, the US and the UK included have agreed on the principal that should a nation fail to protect its citizens from mass killings, either intentionally or through inability to act, it is the internationally community’s responsibility to protect the citizens being affected. It's known as The Responsibility to Protect.

I highly recommend you brush up on it. Before you go around calling things you obviously know very little about non-sence.
http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/

watching the news this morning, i think its telling that no other nations in the region are spooling up military forces, and that the US is prepared to (once more) go it alone in the absence of international allies. i also think the main reason for this is the rest of the world is tired of our warmongering for blatantly obvious enrichment of the military industrial complex, with which i am very well acquainted with and qualified to speak on.

but dont take my word for it...how about the word of the 34th president of the united states and 5 star general of the US army, supreme commander of the allied forces in europe during ww2, dwight d eisenhower:

http://youtu.be/8y06NSBBRtY


what he warned of many decades ago has come to pass.

The final entry into the Syrian Crisis summary from http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/ is most telling.

VII. Latest Developments:

In August 2013, a series of videos, photographs and reports from the ground from Syria indicate that a new chemical weapons attack has killed a high number of civilians in rebel-held areas outside of Damascus, in what, if verified, would be “the world's most lethal chemical weapons attack since the 1980s.” The footage shows a large number of children among the victims of the attacks. Casualty estimates have varied widely, from 500 to over 1300.

The international community called for an immediate investigation of the use of chemical weapons after the attack on civilians. The UN Secretary General has stated that “it is his intention to conduct a thorough, impartial and prompt investigation on the reports of the alleged use of chemical weapons during these attacks.” The team of United Nations inspectors probing the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria spent its first day of investigation at the site of the alleged chemical weapons attack on 26 August. Earlier that day, the convoy carrying the inspectors was attacked by sniper fire, raising more concerns for the international community.

The UN Security Council convened for an emergency session on 21 August to discuss the attacks. However, it remains to be seen whether the Council’s divisions on Syria will be overcome by the latest reports of mass atrocities. Many voices inside and outside of Syria have stated that the international community and the Syrian government have both failed in their responsibility to protect Syrians, a failure that, particularly in light of the alleged attacks, has reached what some are calling a tipping point and requires an immediate and meaningful response.

The US saber may be rattling the loudest, but it's not the only one.

Andy Spalding wrote: The final entry into the Syrian Crisis summary from http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/ is most telling.

The UN Security Council convened for an emergency session on 21 August to discuss the attacks. However, it remains to be seen whether the Council’s divisions on Syria will be overcome by the latest reports of mass atrocities. Many voices inside and outside of Syria have stated that the international community and the Syrian government have both failed in their responsibility to protect Syrians, a failure that, particularly in light of the alleged attacks, has reached what some are calling a tipping point and requires an immediate and meaningful response.

from who? who is this 'international community'? if its the UN, so what? my cousin was a blue hat. his takeaway from that is never again. whats the point? they are almost entirely impotent, just observers with guns.

I love President Eisenhower.

Great man!!!!

We recognize the imperative need for this development yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications…

The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Every sentence well thought out and illustrates exactly the message he wished to convey with simplistic eloquence that even I can understand.

One thing that I would like to point out…

Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry…

It seems to me that so often we take our personal feelings, what we have experienced and formulate an opinion based from our limited exposure to a topic. (Just as I am doing right now) Rather than research and learn more about said topic, we hear something or read something from somewhere and run with it as if it were fact. When in reality, it is most likely someone else’s view or opinion of something.

There is nothing wrong with expressing opinions so long as we recognize that each person has an opinion and it is just as valid as anyone else’s… even if we think they are crazy for having that opinion.

Indeed who am I to try and move the combo toward an actual problem by using evidence, rather than voicing negative bias toward American cowboys or the American military agenda. My bad, I forgot how things roll here.

perhaps he was talking to me, as i too have an opinion apparently. or perhaps your fallback stance is sarcasm, how am i or wes to know.

I am talking to everyone.

I am not warning anyone or taking sides.

I even demonstrated how I too was formulating an opinion based on my experiences.

As my friend would say about discussions…

Heated is cool...

Attacks are not...

We are all different and our mindset differs as well. We are here to share and grow, not to argue about who is right or wrong. And certainly not to belittle each other or each other’s ideas.

Jestor wrote: And, sometimes people dont want the help of others...

That is true, and an important thing to remember, for those who would otherwise seek to be Mr. Helpful all the time, to the annoyance of everyone. (No, I've never had to learn that lesson...)


But on the other hand, I've also learned that sometimes an oppressed person or people are not in a position to be able to ask for help, when in fact they do actually desperately need it. This would certainly seem to be one such case of desperate need. Additionally, I have heard that Syrian citizenry have actually asked for U.S. help in this case. Of course the Syrian government isn't going to ask for help; their chemicals have got it all under control.

Jestor wrote: Sometimes, people want to fight their own battles...

That would imply that they are able to fight back at all against chemical weapons. That would not appear to be the case in this instance. They can want to all day long, but if they are not effectively able to, and international law is being violated, that's when someone else needs to step in.

Jestor wrote: Either you trust the Force to resolve the issue, or, your trust the Force when it tells you in your gut to get involved...

These two things need not be mutually exclusive. Oftentimes we become the centers of expression through which the Force is able to resolve an issue. Trust in the Force is justified either way.

Jestor wrote: Its easy to sit here and judge the actions of those in charge... :huh:

Also very true. I'm sure they don't make any of their decisions lightly or without a few sleepless nights on occasion. It's easy to forget that when a more peaceful solution seems so available and fitting, in reality such a solution may not actually work, which we would know if we had access to all the same information that those in charge have, but we do not.

Andy Spalding wrote: Pile of non-sense eh?

I'll be sure to tell that to the Kurds that Hussein used his WMD's on.
http://uk.krg.org/genocide/pages/page.aspx?lngnr=12&smap=140000&pnr=42

Non-sense,
I'll pass that along to those who are currently fleeing Darfur
http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/genocide/genocide-in-sudan.htm

The 5,000,000 slaughtered in the Congo,

Libya and Syria are both quickly falling into line.

Many members of the UN, the US and the UK included have agreed on the principal that should a nation fail to protect its citizens from mass killings, either intentionally or through inability to act, it is the internationally community’s responsibility to protect the citizens being affected. It's known as The Responsibility to Protect.

I highly recommend you brush up on it. Before you go around calling things you obviously know very little about non-sence.
http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/

No clue what you're going on about. this is the non-sense: "You know how tribal nations deal with problems? Genocide. The middle east and Africa are still very much a tribal society."

genocide is no more a problem in their societies than it is in any other and have nothing to do with tribalism since they aren't tribal. History also shows that it isn't tribalism but nationalism that leads to genocides. "tribe" is by definition a group that is completely distinct from the nation.

Your own examples prove you wrong.
1988: conflict between the nation of iraq and the separatist kurdish nationalists. I wouldnt qualify it as genocide but as massacre because it was 1 day, 1 town, less than 5000 people killed. The civilian casualties would make it a war crim imo, but not genocide.
And darfur/sudan issue is equally an national issue. remote areas feel they are not properly looked after by the authorities, create their own rebel forces (not so different from what led to the creation of the US), sudan authorities do not like it and crush everyone.