The self-determination to massacre the Alawites, Druze, and Christians? Madness. Another imperial intervention will earn points with no one except Israel and the oil sheiks, the antithesis of the "little people".
Printable View
The self-determination to massacre the Alawites, Druze, and Christians? Madness. Another imperial intervention will earn points with no one except Israel and the oil sheiks, the antithesis of the "little people".
You think the bloodbath will be smaller if Assad wins...?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good
He's got an axe to grind as well, and it's getting bigger and bigger every day...
“When you raise your hand, you lose your rights.” “keep your mouth shut.”: That is an open road for War Crimes, you do realise that, do you? So you Hero at My Lay is the Lt William Callay and not the 3 US Servicemen who tried to stop the massacre as they had to “keep their mouth shut”.
I could accept your point when you were arguing for the good of Democracy and Freedom. But now, I really question your goal. And it was Sarmatian accused to be a fascist… Man, Assad soldiers are in your side….
Probably, but the worst of the rebels are already dead or back to where they came from by then. Assad is the best of all bad choises simple as that. Backing the rebels is backing genocide of minorities, just like in Libya. As teh Panzer said, we cannot help these people but we can leave them be. It's the middle-east as it has always have been. Should have backed the green wave in Iran when we had the chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
So if we're calling the human outcomes equivalent, then isn't the Assad-scenario preferable? If half-a-million die, that's surely better than for half-a-million to die while we drop several billion in currency...Quote:
Originally Posted by Horetore
If we intervene, it should really be to enforce stalemate - and partition.
Sure the Chief is speaking out of turn but his opinion is no different than nearly everyone else’s in the matter. From bottom to top the military is not behind it. Nor is the American public.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
Most people are bright enough to know that this is not our war.
If the chemical weapons detonated had been the Russian weapons provided to Syria we would have known it at once and it would be the main selling point.
It was obviously not a persistent nerve agent you get from military grade chemicals.
This is just a NeoCon push hoping to involve Iran in the mess.
Are you sure you want to buy that bridge?
Lol, holding your cards, Hezbollah doesn't get it. Hezbollah wants to defend Damascus. Good. But they also aren't ruling out attacking Israel. But only if they get direct orders from Iran. Any questions?
Assad can't kill all the Sunnis, but the jihadis can kill all the Druze, Alawites, and Christians. That's how being minorities works.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
The only part of the insurrection that knows how to fight are the extremists. Has there been any revolution where the most effective revolutionaries didn't end up in charge of the post-revolution government?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
I agree. We shouldn't be involved at all.Quote:
I would rather we support nobody than support Assad
The liberty to massacre religious minorities. Your "have to break eggs to make omelets" attitude works just as well in favor of Assad. So what if a few thousand protestors and jihadis die to preserve stability and secularism? It's the price of doing business in an unjust world.Quote:
*I mean you can't blame the rebels. Not even the really bad ones. This is what is supposed to happen when a dictator shoots and tortures one too many of his people. Revolutions are bloody, ugly, and more end in failure than success, but they are a vital part of the human experience. Our revolutionary war set records for western distaste at the time. The war of 1812, to follow, included routine massacres of prisoners because the animosity was still there a generation later. This isn't a fairy world, this is reality and these people are fighting for their own version of liberty. Down with dictators.
"The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events in Syria and have therefore raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada.
The Scots have raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's get the Bastards." They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.
The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralysing the country's military capability.
Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."
The Germans have increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose."
Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.
The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.
Australia, meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries" to "She'll be alright, Mate." Two more escalation levels remain: "Crikey! I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!" and "The barbie is cancelled." So far no situation has ever warranted use of the last final escalation level.
-- John Cleese - British writer, actor and tall person.
In a flip-flop to my previous post, the occupation in Iraq had a favorable outcome, due to the skill of the Army. My assertion that they are inept is baseless and faulty based on a review of the current situation in post-occupation Iraq.
Plenty, there literarily thousands of euro-jihadis, but Hezbollahalso decided to join the fun, 0000 zeroes so a lot anywayQuote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
“You didn't even quote me right.” Err, I copy and paste: Difficult to quote not right.
“How does showing basic military professionalism translate to committing war-crimes?” Showing basic military professionalism doesn’t implicate “you lose your rights”. That means to obey legal orders based on lawful decisions.
“The Army is breaking down because the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.” I don’t know. However, I think this can be due to the fact that engaged twice in dodgy wars without any real purpose, soldiers don’t see why they fought. We had this in France after Algeria, when the Army won the war but Algeria became independent nevertheless. We even had a putsch then a terrorist campaign by the most extremist of the most lost soldiers. Professional units rebelled as they couldn’t see why their members had died in vain (most famous one being the 1st Régiment Etranger de Parachutistes – Foreign Legion). Other units as the 2nd Régiment Etranger de Parachutistes stayed in the legality, but still, it took ages to cure the army of useless wars and battles.
The thing about the chemical attacks is that it favours Assad, due to the rebels having urban superiority due to mass of small arms, whilst the more conventional forces such as tanks get bogged down with the narrow streets, high rise buildings and are very susceptible. This is why orders from above to Assad's forces forewarn about chemical attacks, which clears an area then the army just marches in virtually unopposed. I am pretty convinced the chemical attacks are done by Assad and he is evidently benefiting from them. The blood of his people is on his hands, men, women and children.
The issue starts to come in with "What do we do about it?". There is the UN Red-line on Chemical Weapons. I hope the UN gets the guts to actually condemn Assad and commission an UN Taskforce perhaps seeking assistance of NATO and Russia, and I hope Russia decides to do the right thing over its own personal interest such as profiting from the arms dealing.
The use of Chemical Weapons, Biological Weapons and Nuclear Weapons such be met with very serious consequences from the UN.
Assad should step down, there is no doubt about it. have some one else in the regime take-over, some one who is interested in resolving the issue peacefully. With co-operation between the new regime and the moderate forces within the rebels, there is a chance to form a stable and perhaps democratic state in the region.
Arming the rebels, simply bombing the place, it is fighting fire with fire, it will burn down Syria even more significantly just to get Assad removed by force.
All people referring to UN and Chemical weapons should read who signed the treaty and not, and who carry on the produce Chemical (and biological) weapons. That will be enlightening... And who didn't ratified it... Then who used it massively after W.W.2 (clue: Vietnam) (dioxin component)?
Just finished emailing my senator and congressman to vote "nay" on any action against Syria. That's about all I can do to prevent this madness, but at least I did my part.
I've never understood the point or meaning of the "write your congressman"-thing you yanks do.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Their votes are supposed to reflect the sentiment of their constituents. I just made sure that my sentiment is known.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
So.........Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
The congressman won't be able to read most or any of the letters due to the sheer volume of it, but he can get too scared to act if the emailbombing is particularly fierce.
So, you've succeeded in replacing informed and well thought out commentary with fear induced by email spamming.
How is that a good thing, exactly?
And you believe that by reading his email inbox now, you will get a proper view of the feelings in your district?Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Or will it be a case of those who scream loudest forcing their view through?
Writing to your MP is a big thing in Britain too. They mostly do not reply though.
It's a case of me having a limited number of tools at my disposal. I can either do nothing or use the limited tools available to me (i.e. emailing the congressman). Whether or not there are many others like me in this district, I do not know, but I feel strongly enough about this issue to fire off an email to the guy whom I helped send to Washington. If I stay silent, I'll be just as liable myself for the unwanted outcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Ugh, what did I just read...Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
It is a politician's job to be professional and to respond in a measured and appropriate way to such correspondence. Writing to your MP/Congressman/whoever is one of the most basic and direct ways for a citizen to engage with their elected representative. This is one of the few ways the two parties can actually have an "informed and well thought out commentary", although you seem to think we should forsake such a democratic and free exchange of ideas, just in case our representative is such a useless bundle of nerves that he caves in at the slightest expression of public opinion.
You know HoreTore you come out with some strange stuff when you look for issues to take up with people you disagree with. I thought you were all about grassroots democracy, civic engagement and all that.
Not a bad take on where and why:
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...-syria-against
FYI, Chuck Hagel is also a buffoon.
When he said that Russia is supplying them with chemical weapons- he actually meant they're not. That's a hell of a "clarification". :yes:Quote:
It all happened in an exchange with Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., during which Hagel said it’s no secret that the Assad regime has significant stockpiles of chemical weapons.
When Wilson asked where they’d come from, Hagel said, “Well, the Russians supply them. Others are supplying them with those chemical weapons. They make some themselves.”
After the hearing had concluded, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little issued a clarification, explaining that Hagel was referring to the “well-known conventional arms relationship between Syria and Russia.”
“So two wrongs make a right?” Err, that was not my intent: my view is when you invoke legality, check the facts. Syria didn’t sign the Convention, so, even if Assad used gas, he broke no law. I can’t have you to pay for a rent you didn’t sign for, right?
It is how the USA justified the use of Orange gas in Vietnam as it was intended against vegetation, not human beings, at least not “intentionally”.
“distorting my point for your own ends.” Yeap. That is what we call a debate.
“the Islamists have been chosen by their people” As the Soviets were by their? Legitimacy goes to the best armed… Can I remind you that Assad is winning (according to some sources, I didn’t check, to be honest), so he is the legitimate power…
I recently had occasion to contact my MP. Afterwards I had the impulse to shout Sieg Heil at him. Pour quoi? Because my MP is David Ward the well known fascist and Jew hater. I dont know why the Lib Dems let these racists and misogynists in but they do. And they call UKIP nutters!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiaexz
Oh yay our minister of shaking hands with other people who shake hands seems to be very eager to shake hands. Piss off with your war, nobody wants war. @ Syrians: Sorry in advance should the Netherlands gets involved in this, don't dispise me, it wasn't me, I hope you understand that
Agent Orange was meant for vegetation. While the timing of the discovery is in question, Monsanto screwed up the manufacturing process which allowed the dioxin contamination to occur. Spraying the countryside with dioxin was not the original plan. Of course, the original plan was to starve the peasants out of the fields and into the US controlled cities, so it's not much of an improvement. ~:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
"Of course, the original plan was to starve the peasants out of the fields and into the US controlled cities, so it's not much of an improvement" And to deprive the Ho Chi Minh Trail of its cover, if I remember well. Of course starving to death the locals was good as well...
And to think of all the neocon tears spent over Obama's nomination of that anti-war anti-semite. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou