Mixed Feelings On Syria

[Churchmouse]

Seeing the bodies of those killed by a chemical attack are disturbing, but I can't erase the past.

After 9/11 they showed reactions around the world. In Damascus, Syria the people were cheering in the streets. I have a problem defending people who would like to see America destroyed and jubilant that thousands of innocent civilians were killed.

[beefche]

Seeing the bodies of those killed by a chemical attack are disturbing, but I can't erase the past.

After 9/11 they showed reactions around the world. In Damascus, Syria the people were cheering in the streets. I have a problem defending people who would like to see America destroyed and jubilant that thousands of innocent civilians were killed.

I can't base my feelings on one or two images which was shown by our media (who has an agenda, no matter what news source it came from). And I can't base my own moral dislike of war or killing based on people's feelings on Americans.

I don't have much of a political opinion on Syria, but I do feel sorry for all the innocent people who are going through hell from many evil people.

[NeuroTypical]

I like Stratfor's take on the whole thing:

[President] Obama now faces the second time in his presidency when war was an option. The first was Libya. The tyrant is now dead, and what followed is not pretty. And Libya was easy compared to Syria. Now, the president must intervene to maintain his credibility. But there is no political support in the United States for intervention. He must take military action, but not one that would cause the United States to appear brutish. He must depose al Assad, but not replace him with his opponents. He never thought al Assad would be so reckless. Despite whether al Assad actually was, the consensus is that he was. That's the hand the president has to play, so it's hard to see how he avoids military action and retains credibility. It is also hard to see how he takes military action without a political revolt against him if it goes wrong, which it usually does.

I can't bring myself to feel very partisan about the whole issue.

[FunkyTown]

Seeing the bodies of those killed by a chemical attack are disturbing, but I can't erase the past.

After 9/11 they showed reactions around the world. In Damascus, Syria the people were cheering in the streets. I have a problem defending people who would like to see America destroyed and jubilant that thousands of innocent civilians were killed.

Were the faces of those who were gassed the faces of those who were cheering? If not, or if you don't know, is it okay to condemn a group of people based upon what another group of people from that area did?

[EarlJibbs]

Seeing the bodies of those killed by a chemical attack are disturbing, but I can't erase the past.

After 9/11 they showed reactions around the world. In Damascus, Syria the people were cheering in the streets. I have a problem defending people who would like to see America destroyed and jubilant that thousands of innocent civilians were killed.

Is the sentence then death to Syrians for cheering when 9/11 happened? Have you ever felt joy over someone elses suffering? And should you die for that? I see what you are saying, but we should take the higher ground here and help humans (not saying we should put boots on the ground) where we can. They are our Brothers and Sisters.

Edited August 29, 2013 by EarlJibbs

[prisonchaplain]

The tyrants that await are even worse than the tyrants who are.

I like what one Christian leader recently said: I don't represent a donkey or an elephant. I represent a lion [of Judah].

Any political commentary on this will sound pragmatic--even cunning. I wish our leaders would learn what I was taught in kindergarten: If there is nothing nice to say then say nothing.

[Blackmarch]

Seeing the bodies of those killed by a chemical attack are disturbing, but I can't erase the past.

After 9/11 they showed reactions around the world. In Damascus, Syria the people were cheering in the streets. I have a problem defending people who would like to see America destroyed and jubilant that thousands of innocent civilians were killed.

Ideed. the command to love thy neighbor is probably one of the hardest, especially if a neighbor is set against you.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Blackmarch

[Windseeker]

Who exactly are we defending by dumping some ordinance on Syria?

It's a mess and it's time the U.S. starts learning from it's mistakes and stays out of this one.

[Blackmarch]

Who exactly are we defending by dumping some ordinance on Syria?

It's a mess and it's time the U.S. starts learning from it's mistakes and stays out of this one.

There is a fine line that the US has to tread in involvement, and generally its either too far on one side or the other.

If we don't get involved at all things can evolve to a world wide conflict. If we get over involved we waste our strength and alienate possible allies. Many times the situation is damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[NeuroTypical]

Who exactly are we defending by dumping some ordinance on Syria?

We're defending our reputation and geopolitical street cred as world's only superpower. And we're also defending the next umpteen civilians in umpteen other countries, whose leaders might use WMD on them in the future, but for fear of US reprisals.

If we do nothing in Syria, there's plenty of two-bit dictators who will say "Good - the US won't come get me - time to gas the opposition's home town".

We're either the world's policeman, or we aren't. Pick one, and live with the consequenses. People die either way.

[Just_A_Guy]

A hypothetical:

We bomb Syria. Then we put boots on the ground. Those boots on the ground find unused chemical weapons with stamps that say "made in Iraq" and documentation that these weapons were imported in late 2002-early 2003; and learn that last week's attack was also done with Iraqi-made weaponry.

Will that news ever go public?

On another tangent, in anticipation of some shameless schadenfreude (humor me; as a paleocon it's all I've got left these days): Well, golly gee willikers; I sure hope President Obama and Secretaries Kerry and Panetta have a plan to win the peace once Assad's gone.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Just_A_Guy

[ElectofGod]

We bombed iran because they stopped using the dollar. Now they are using it again. Now syria has started to go to gold, now we are setting it up to do the same thing. Why? Because we will have global collapse (USA mainly) if the dollar becomes worthless. This is the end times, it will happen, they can only delay it so long. This QE they are doing, pumping millions into the "fake" economy is pointless but delays the financial collapse. Why do you think the government is buying billions worth of ammo and food now? Zion just may be in our generation. The Lord is giving us an opportunity what many in the past has waited for their whole lives.

[NeuroTypical]

We bombed iran because they stopped using the dollar. Now they are using it again. Now syria has started to go to gold, now we are setting it up to do the same thing.

You think we're going to lob tomahawks, and maybe invade, because a measley $100 billion GDP country might leave the dollar? That makes no sense to me.

* You wage economic war through economic means.

* Syria leaving the dollar would have zero impact on a global economic collapse.

Why do you think the government is buying billions worth of ammo and food now?

Because that's what it always does. Every year it happens, someone gets all end-of-the-world-y about it, but I've been watching it go by for at least 8 years now. You'd think if they were going to herd us into FEMA camps, they would have done it before the 2005 food went bad.

I'm finding your line of reasoning hard to accept.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[Just_A_Guy]

You think we're going to lob tomahawks, and maybe invade, because a measley $100 billion GDP country might leave the dollar? That makes no sense to me.

* You wage economic war through economic means.

* Syria leaving the dollar would have zero impact on a global economic collapse.

I surmise he meant to type "Iraq" rather than ""Iran".

[mdfxdb]

options as I see them:

- do nothing (I like this one)

- Pick a side (make sure our side wins)

The do nothing option is the best because we can then deal with the winners. We've already lost face because our foreign policy stinks. Nobody is going to believe anything we do. Even if we do throw a couple of missles at them, so what? What have we proven? We're just making a forceful statement that they should kill eachother in a civilized manner and not use gas?

The winners of this conflict will have to deal with us at some point. It's too late for action now, but when we are dealing with the winners of the conflict we let them know our terms for behavior, and if they don't comply then we turn the place into a desert. We don't ask permission from the UN, we don't give warnings, we act. Anything short of that and we have nothing, and we are better off not getting involved period.

[NeuroTypical]

I agree, he probably meant Iraq. And the case could (and has been) made that going to war for geoeconomical reasons can be justified. (I'm not sure I buy the argument, but at least it makes sense.) But Syria is small potatoes in geoeconomical terms - with the large numbers of countries who do not use the dollar, who cares what currency Syria uses?

[Guest]

I think the time where we could afford to police the world is past. We need to clean up our own messes first.

[ElectofGod]

Yes I don't know exactly either. Its interesting because war is actually what has kept (and caused) this countries problems besides just plain old greed. Now its the one thing that may keep us afloat. Who cares? I think it has to do with oil reserves and controlling the market. We rely on china for everything. Thats my guess. I have no clue though.

As soon as other nations start leaving the dollar, other nations follow. China is trying already, stalking up over 2 tons of cotton. The GMO infestation of crops here causing other countries to magically stop buying our food, causing massive amounts of farmers to go bankrupt more so. Uh! Who do we owe money to? China, and other places. As soon as they go away from the dollar (already started to) it becomes useless. What happens when we have an already inflated dollar become useless to other countries because USA currency becomes the non standard? They won't accept it. Its useless. Than we owe china a huge debt. Which we pay or suffer consequences. Its already almost useless. An inflated meaningless dollar, poeople will lose everything in the banks almost.

Are we paying attention? "rumors of wars in other lands" next "rumors of wars in our own lands"... Famines, water supply now less than 50% in most places, Russia is warning US. They are going to fight, than the rest of the nations have ot get pulled into it. WIII? Maybe. Eventually it will turn into civil unrest with massive starvation, joseph smith said so. But most likely, the collapse of the dollar causes millitia, collapse of society, and government control. Thats what everything has been about for the past 2 or 3 presidents maybe longer. Control, world order, greed, gain money money money. I have been reading about the Nazi's in world war II. Man were doing the same thing in our own land. How can we not see it? The mainstream propaganda is numbing us.

I agree, its time to clean up our own mess.

But the mainstream media continues to "convince" us it is a needed war. Seriously get food storage before its too late. Yet there seems to be a 6-25% acceptance. Lets watch it go up and up. Either that they will fake the polls and tell us it has gone up when the peoples minds are still at 6-25%.

As you can tell I have become quite upset .. BUT when these come, Zion is upon us :) If we can get through the mess lol.

Edited August 29, 2013 by ElectofGod

[Guest]

Elect, where did you get that 6-25 figure?

[ElectofGod]

A random mainstream news site said 9% and huffingpost said 25%. Not reliable sources lol. But still. So I just read UK said no to the strike but obama is considering solo strike? Which he does not have power to do so. Guess we will see, hold on tight.

British lawmakers reject military action in Syria, in setback for Obama administration | Fox News

Obama Weighing Syria Strike Without Allies, Aide Says

Edited August 29, 2013 by ElectofGod

[panacea]

But will Biden call for impeachment if Obama rolls forward?

Edited August 29, 2013 by panacea

[yjacket]

There is a fine line that the US has to tread in involvement, and generally its either too far on one side or the other.

If we don't get involved at all things can evolve to a world wide conflict. If we get over involved we waste our strength and alienate possible allies. Many times the situation is damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I've got to disagree with things evolving into a world wide conflict. One of the worst things the US did in its history was to get involved in WWI. That act has set the stage for all the junk that is happening today.

WWI happened because too many countries had too many alliances with other countries so it was a domino affect that eventually involved a lot of countries. Before the US got involved things had gotten into a stalemate. Both sides were wasting precious manpower, resources, energy destroying each other. Had things played out a truce would been called and Germany would not have been utterly destroyed by the victors, and the rest of history would have been quite different.

What countries on earth have the military, financial, and manpower resources to wage a world war? Russia, China, US, and that's about it. Many countries, especially the poorer states obtain all their weaponry from the US- the US (or better put US companies) are some of the leading suppliers of weaponry to the entire world.

If the US stays out, it is darn near impossible for anything in Syria to expand beyond the Middle East.

[yjacket]

Seeing the bodies of those killed by a chemical attack are disturbing, but I can't erase the past.

After 9/11 they showed reactions around the world. In Damascus, Syria the people were cheering in the streets. I have a problem defending people who would like to see America destroyed and jubilant that thousands of innocent civilians were killed.

It is sad to see those reactions . . . but one must understand the why, why were they cheering.

As one taxi driver told a friend of mine who was in Damascus at the time of 9/11 STTE of "I feel sorry for your country, but you deserved it". Why would some taxi driver feel like the US deserved it . . .

I don't know, but I know for a fact if China was mucking around in Mexico, Canada, overthrowing countries in North America, bombing them and other countries close to the US . . . I'd prob. think something similar if China got whacked.

Unfortunately, instead of analyzing the reasons why and being introspective and saying you know maybe the US is wrong, maybe we screwed up here and there, many people like to puff up their feathers and say: How dare they Hate the US, don't you know we are the Greatest, most Free, most Awesomest Country on the face of the Planet that Exists and has ever Existed.

Now before anyone accuses me of being a pacifist, I think Afghanistan was the right move, but it should have been in/out quick not some long ill-defined mission.

[yjacket]

Just to be clear ElectofGod was referring to reserve currency. Just about every country on the face of the planet, except (to my knowledge and their may be others) NK, Iran, Venezuela hold the majority of their reserves in US dollars. Iran, Venezuela, NK use Gold and other currencies.

For a quick summary, the entire banking system of the entire world is a ponzi scheme running on credit. Before 1913, the system (i.e. credit) was backed by physical gold. After 1973 the world credit system is backed by the US dollar. Basically the rest of the world inflates their money supply based on US dollars. The more dollars they hold the more they can inflate their money supply. We export to the world dollars and we import all their stuff. It is why one will never see a trade surplus. If we ever have a trade surplus, and the Fed is printing like they are . . . look out.

Based on the way the system is set up, when the US dollar loses its reserve currency status, we will be no different than most other countries in the world and things could get pretty interesting.

Is it a major reason, I don't know, but I know it is a factor. Follow the money. Who benefits from a war?

[Churchmouse]

We have to stop sending our troops all over the world. The countries they have been fighting for haven't changed at all. Within a few years of us leaving Afganistan the Taliban will be in power again. Look at the turmoil in Iraq. It's a waste of time and our young men and women shouldn't be dying thee.