Syria

[Howey]

I've received a lot of flack over the situation in the Mideast, particularly Egypt, Libya, and now Syria.

I posted this elsewhere and it gives explanation of why I support the people in all three nations, and the air strikes on Syria.

As far as what's going on, yes I know. Assad is killing thousands of people while the PC rest of the world lets it happen because to act on the knowledge of him using chemical weapons without positive, definite proof would put us right back to Bush's invasion of Iraq for what he claimed was WMD.

I also know Assad needs to go. I don't know if you've read any of my posts, but one point I like to make about any conflict like this is I support the wishes of the people. I was opposed to the Vietnam conflict because there was no need for it...the people of Vietnam were happy with their communist government. They didn't want us there.

Same with Iraq. Same with Afghanistan. The people are happy with their miserable existence under a brutal dictator. They don't care they've been brainwashed by the government - the government provided them with electricity, food, water, education, and health care.

They don't want us there.

Since Vietnam, this nation should have learned that you cannot change a country, you cannot change how the people of a country feel about democracy, you cannot change the government of a country - if the people don't want you to.

That's the big difference between the Arab Spring uprisings and the situations in Libya, Egypt, and Syria. The people want change. They want their dictator gone. They want democracy, even western ways (btw...the desire of a capitalistic culture and blue jeans and rock and roll is what eventually what caused the upheaval in Vietnam, Thailand, and other far east nations. It was a cultural incursion, not a military one.) We must support them in this quest or our Constitution isn't worth the parchment it's written on. This country was founded on freedom from oppression, who are we to deny other nations that chance?

I'm also aware al Qaeda is infiltrating the rebels in Libya and Syria, and other factions are supporting the military in Egypt. They're providing them with the weapons and ammo to fight their civil war because we won't. I'm also aware the US has indirectly supplied non-military aid to these factions.

I'm also aware al Qaeda are a terrorist organization and are doing this for their own good. Much like a non-violent organization supported the original Egyptian regime change, the Muslim Brotherhood; who then managed to elect a President with their religious views in mind.

Why is the current upheaval in Egypt, Syria, and Libya occurring? Because the people want peace. They don't want a dictator in charge, they don't want a religious sect running their country...they want a democratic, sectarian government. Just like we have. Who are we to deny them that? Who are we to not assist them in this goal?

It's a massive change. One they've not experienced in years. At one time Libya, and Egypt were vacation destinations with a fervent middle class, top notch education, universities and a happy people. (For that matter, so was Afghanistan) They want that life back.

There's going to be hiccups along the way. There already are. But I repeat - we must help them reach their goal.

(This is probably the most succinct view of the middle east I've written on here. I hope y'all will understand why I support our government's future goals in these three nations.)

Syria. I feel for the children killed by a dictator with chemical weapons. I actually draw a bit of my VA disability because of exposure to sarin gas while I was in the military, so that makes me even more sensitive to the situation.

There's over two million refugees from Syria right now, and the number's increasing exponentially daily. We need to do this for the children, we need to take away Assad's chemical weapons, we need to take away Assad's military, we need to take out Assad.

For the people (© John Morgan).

[44nutman]

Nobel called Obama and wants their prize back.

We are not even sure who fired the chemical weapons and after the lies from Iraq I am a little gun shy in trusting government sponsored intel.
As Lil Mike liked to point out, the Poles did find a couple canisters of nerve gas, that degraded so much it really was not nerve gas anymore.  So I guess technically Iraq had WMD's.

Here is the other thing, the rebels includes Al Qaeda. I am also not saying Assad is not a cruel dictator, he definitely fits the definition.
Let the UN handle it, we can add support but to go in Han fucking Solo is not what needs to be done.

I just find it comical the same people against invading Iraq, fully support going after Syria. I am sick of the role of the World Police when there are starving children in my very own country.
Shit there are worse dictators in Africa and I just wondering why are we so selective with our military might.
Chad, Somalia, DR Congo, Sierra Leone, North Korea, just to name a few treat their people just as shitty or worse than  Syria. Should we invade them alphabetically or draw numbers.
The first 4 are so fucking dirt poor we don't give a shit. The other would piss off China.
My heart goes out to the people of Syria, but if the rest of the world don't want to help, then we should follow their lead.

[reverend_darth]

Our fucking government can't get a fucking thing done here and now want's to go fuck around someplace else?  All those cocksuckers are out of their god damned minds!

[ekg]

Here is the other thing, the rebels includes Al Qaeda. I am also not saying Assad is not a cruel dictator, he definitely fits the definition.
Let the UN handle it, we can add support but to go in Han fucking Solo is not what needs to be done.

I just find it comical the same people against invading Iraq, fully support going after Syria. I am sick of the role of the World Police when there are starving children in my very own country.
Shit there are worse dictators in Africa and I just wondering why are we so selective with our military might.
Chad, Somalia, DR Congo, Sierra Leone, North Korea, just to name a few treat their people just as shitty or worse than  Syria. Should we invade them alphabetically or draw numbers.
The first 4 are so fucking dirt poor we don't give a shit. The other would piss off China.
My heart goes out to the people of Syria, but if the rest of the world don't want to help, then we should follow their lead.

I mostly agree with all of this..

otoh.. there is a part of me that because I'm so tired of the conflict, I just want to go Caesar on these assholes.. ya know back in the Roman empire days.. a Roman was the safest thing to be..you could pretty much go anywhere in the 'known' world you wanted.. why? Simple, if anyone killed a Roman citizen Rome came down upon them and decimated their country/people/society..

This whole Syrian thing will affect us through higher gas prices, which will never go back down because God forbid a gas company give up some of their profits..

higher gas will make groceries rise even higher. I'm shocked each week at the level of grocery prices. $5 for a pound of generic bacon? when the hell did bacon become on the same level as a decent steak? Not to mention $1.19 for the small can of tuna? wtf? Apples $5lb? Cereal? $5 for a box of raisin bran?$2.50 for a loaf of wheat bread? ARGH!... but again, God forbid these corp bring down their cost when gas prices come back down..

it also makes wall street go all hinkey.. which makes me lose money because then people hold onto their cash instead of spending it.. and we've had way too much of that these last 8 years..

so IMO we either walk away and let the UN handle it and stop the bullshit rhetoric.. or we bomb them til they fucking cry. Yes, kids will die.. but kids are always dying.. they're dying in Somalia and we don't care.. hell they're dying in Detroit and Chicago..and we ignore it... so that argument doesn't work for me..

sometimes it would just be nice to be "Roman" and not have anyone fuck with us for awhile because to do so would bring the Wrath of God down upon them..

[reverend_darth]

it also makes wall street go all hinkey.. which makes me lose money because then people hold onto their cash instead of spending it.. and we've had way too much of that these last 8 years..

Cocksuckin politicians have half killed my business, and wont be happy until they fuckin do.  But it's OK because those mutha fuckers will still be fine.  And of course their military industrial corporate welfare friends will make a shit load more off of our backs.

[44nutman]

Here is a report that it was the rebels that used the gas. This whole Syria has been using WMD's, lets invade, is like Deja Vu all over again. (copyright Yogi Berra)

http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-attack-say-saudis-supplied-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/

As of 05/2013 articles were saying  the rebels were using gas.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2013/0506/UN-investigator-suggests-it-was-Syria-s-rebels-who-used-chemical-weapons

Turks arrested Syrian rebels that possessed Sarin gas.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/us-syria-crisis-turkey-idUSBRE94T0YO20130530

If John Kerry is going to play the role of Gen Colin Powell could we at least put him in black face.

[ekg]

Here is a report that it was the rebels that used the gas. This whole Syria has been using WMD's, lets invade, is like Deja Vu all over again. (copyright Yogi Berra)

http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-attack-say-saudis-supplied-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/

As of 05/2013 articles were saying  the rebels were using gas.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2013/0506/UN-investigator-suggests-it-was-Syria-s-rebels-who-used-chemical-weapons

Turks arrested Syrian rebels that possessed Sarin gas.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/us-syria-crisis-turkey-idUSBRE94T0YO20130530

If John Kerry is going to play the role of Gen Colin Powell could we at least put him in black face.

the problem nutty is all that information is more speculative than what you're accusing Kerry of..

the 1st story from a source I don't know,is basing it off what the father of a victim said his son said... and a lot of other anonymous hearsay..

the 2nd story is from .csmonitor.com.. they're very slanted and not too trustworthy when it comes to news.. but I went to their BBC link and even that's just one woman making the claim.. and the UN was stunned by her claim.. and immediately denied it..

the 3rd story from Reuters mentions 12 'suspects' caught, 6 released and none of them had sarin on them.. maybe they had some chem-weapons, but maybe they didn't..it's unknown at this point..

none of this is an open and shut indictment against the rebels..

not that I think they wouldn't drop gas if they had it.. they have been taken over by AlQ..anything is possible..  but at this point there's really no evidence at all to back up a claim that it was the rebels,supplied by the Saudi prince, who released the sarin..But it does lend support as to why Obama has been so wary of doing anything about it..

[Howey]

Sheesh. Now I know how mike felt.

[uselesslegs]

Here's the part that burns my ass, I mean really burns my ass.  THIS is the discussion we should have been having, the serious engaged, down to the bone discussion concerning Iraq. I don't mean just here, but what we see taking place across almost all media formats, in the Congress and Senate, the President being *seriously* engaged.  Have we suddenly gotten our intellect and curiosity on? Fuck no.  The primary reason the level of in depth scrutiny we should apply to ALL military action, as any country should who possess military might and who should use vast measured reasoning before unleashing it, is a mix of gun shy and...ANOTHER platform to hammer swing on President Obama.  The distrust isn't from the information, it's on the Commander-in-Chief.

It drives me fuck'in batty to know not even a decade ago, ANY opposition to the then war being sought, with the blood lust in our eyes from 9/11, was shut the fuck down with the not-so-subtle overtones of unpatriotic, treasonous, terrorist sympathizer. You couldn't scrutinize then President Bush or his vanguard about going to war, that something seemed *wrong*, out of place, incorrect. Don't you DARE cast one stone, not even a pebble, in the form of a question that would DARE also by it's asking, insinuate or imply that perhaps the President and his front men were pursing something for the wrong reasons or on questionable intel.  No, you shut the fuck up Mr. Muslim Lover, you're disrespecting the President with your...questions...how dare you!

Flash forward. Now it's OK to question the President, his frontmen. Question the shit out of them...as it should be when considering war. Here's the rub...

"A poll, constructed by Dartmouth government professor Benjamin Valentino and conducted by YouGov from April 26 to May 2 2012, found that fully 63 percent of Republican respondents still believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded in 2003. By contrast, 27 percent of independents and 15 percent of Democrats shared that view."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21/iraq-wmd-poll-clueless-vast-majority-republicans_n_1616012.html
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~benv/files/poll%20responses%20by%20party%20ID.pdf

...Do you see that? Do you get the bag of brick's dropping on your head implication here?  The same assholes, who's counter parts are now sitting on committees and chairs in the Congress and Senate, who STILL believe that Iraq HAD/HAS WMD's, even though NONE were ever produced and have since found out our intel for going to war was a gigantic crock of lying bullshit, question whether Assad used syrian gas, whether the rebels used it, or (as I've seen) whether it was actually used at all.  Where the fuck does all this measured reasoning come from all of the sudden...the fuckers still think WMD's and the other reasons for going to war in Iraq were never in question, despite reality slapping them around...jesus christ!

I want this latest potential war venture picked down to the marrow, in excruciating, mind numbing detail. We need to know with 90+ certainty that we're following the correct course of action. I DO NOT, however, want the questioning and scrutiny to be pursued because it's wonderful nut kicking opposition. That defeats the entire fucking purpose of what measured caution and scrutiny should ACTUALLY be about.  That the two, in this case, just happen to happily coincide should scare the shit out of you, because what if a future President (as Bush) isn't put under the same inquisitive microscope because he's not *loathed* to pursue things any further?

This all should be questioned, at extensive length, but it's happening for the wrong reasons.  These assholes want the middle east bombed off the face of the earth, all of it(Praise Jeebuz)...but luckily for us, their suspicion and loathing of President Obama, in all things, outweighs the usual warmonger, military industrial complex boner.  Yeah for us?

[Howey]

Y'all a bunch of unamericans.

[uselesslegs]

Y'all a bunch of unamericans.

You bastid!