Lots of people read your (I'll be kind) poetic musings, but few come away understanding more than a phrase or two.
There is a high likelyhood that we will be drawn into a lenghty war if we strike Syria. There are no good guys in this war. If we are drawn in, we will end up arming terrorists. Our economy is in the shitter. We can't afford another war. I'd ask a hypothetical question of the folks that think we should get involved: If Russia or China were to use WMDs to put down an uprising/revolution, would you support sending them a message with missile strikes? Go Blazers
That wasn't exactly the question. Sanctions might work on those two countries but, what, we would stand by while they might use gas dozens of times to put down the insurrection before sanctions had any effect? If the goal is to send a message that using WMDs on civilians is absolutely unacceptable, why would we treat them differently? Go Blazers
So your argument is if we can't stop Russia or China from doing it we shouldn't stop Syria? The honest answer to your question would be to use sanctions if either of those two countries were do start gassing their own people. If we were to attack either country it could very quickly lead to a nuclear war so we would not attack them.
Ha! Do you think the President would ask congress to debate the question oldguy ask? If he did, my guess is congress would debate an entirely different question.
Actually I thought Sly ask the question about supporting a strike against Russia or China instead of oldguy.
Is your argument that that it is only a military-strike-worthy atrocity if a weaker country does it? If we strike Syria, it could lead to a nuclear war, too. Go Blazers
First let me be clear, I am not in favor of a US led strike on Syria. I would rather see the UN make the decision of some sort of military intervention with the US supporting it. I think that would lessen the chance of it escalating into a nuclear war. But more importantly in the future I would like the US to support world policing actions when they are needed instead of leading them. To answer your military-strike-worthy question, these types of actions should always be decided on a case by case, country by country basis. It seems obvious to me that what would work in one country might not work for a different country no matter the size of that country. If we can get a country to stop gassing their own citizens without bombing the shit out of them we should do it. Seems like you are looking for some uniform one size fits all policy or basing what we should do in Syria on that type of policy. I don't see how that is feasible or practical.
Damn! That is a good position Sly. It pretty much mirrors my opinion. But I will have to point out that bombing the shit out of Syria to punish Assad is ignorant. If we are not going to take him out for his atrocity then we only will be killing Syrians that probably had nothing to do with the evil deed. That is wrong and can't lead the anything good. Saving face for Barry is not going to happen with another stupid act.
We should use a little Sun Tzu and assassinate Assad. Then politely ask the person who takes his place if he would like to use gas on his people. Eventually we will find a leader in Syria who will decide it is best for his health if he doesn't.
Yes, spot on again. I have read a couple page from that book here lately just to refresh. When I hear some of these guys say what their are saying, I can only shake my head, get pissed and then come post some trash in here or the Political forum for relief. It is a complete misnomer to speak of our leaders as it sits now.
I've read many versions but my favorite is by James Clavell. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15734429-sun-tzu-s-the-art-of-war
Also Bush Sr followed the Art of War during the first Iraq war but GW Bush and Rumsfeld completely ignored it during the 2nd Iraq war.
There are at least 24 different versions for sale currently on Amazon and that doesn't include the stupid rip off versions like the Art of War for business, the Art of War for love making, the Art of War of Star Wars, etc. The Clavell is very good but also brief. You should check out some others when you have the chance. The different translations and interpretations are interesting.
I was one of the first voters and 'don't know, needs more information' option. Since then, I have read a fair amount more and feel comfortable moving over to the 'No, Stay out of their war' option. War is a baaadddd choice.
Good for you Further, read and learn. I could be persuaded to for action IF we had a mandate from some credible organization and other nations to share the burden and IF the mission was to take out Assad and install a known replacement that was acceptable to the Syrians. Obama seems to have some parts missing in his vision of the mission.
