If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   US prepares to add the most important northern Syrian rebel group to its list of banned terrorist organizations. But it will have to fight alongside them if Assad uses chemical weapons. Why do we play World Police again?   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 6
    More: Stupid, United States, Syrians, Islamists, guerrilla war, National Coalition Party, chemical weapons, jihadists, sectarian violence  
•       •       •

411 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Dec 2012 at 10:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-06 07:30:55 AM  
4 votes:
Because
A) Syria is next to Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey and may attack or destabilize one or more of them.

B) Turkey is a NATO ally and the U.S. is required to come to their aid, Saudi provides oil to much of Western Europe and it would be bad for their economy, and therefore our economy, to have a major disruption in energy supplies, and no US politician dares ignore Israel if he wants to be reelected.
2012-12-06 12:02:52 PM  
1 votes:
In the modern world, very few things are black-and-white, but when a country that's been trading shots with a NATO member and fighting a civil war starts firing missiles loaded with chemical weapons, it's time to step in. Intervention is a bad idea a lot of the time, but this call isn't even close.
2012-12-06 11:29:55 AM  
1 votes:

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Happy Hours: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Why is killing your own populace with bullets and missiles acceptable but gassing them isn't? Torture thousands of children, get a sternly worded letter. Drop some gas on a safe house, the world unites against you.

Because most of the civilized world decided after WWI that chemical weapons were very bad.

Assad's killed what, tens of thousands with conventional weapons? I just find it weird that it's somehow more abhorrent to the world to use chemical weapons, rather than torturing children to death.


My guess is that people object because a) defensive and counter-offensive measures are nonexistent and b) unlike conventional weapons, the area of effect is unpredictable. You can wear a bulletproof vest, or hide in a bunker during an artillery barrage, or try to shoot down the drone or jet carrying the bombs and missiles, but there's nothing you can do once the biological and chemical agents are out. Once effective defenses are developed for them, their use will become more acceptable in warfare.

Also, unlike a conventional weapon, WMDs are specifically designed for wide dispersal and that's a big problem. Just think of how much effort the United States puts in to developing accurate weapons systems; I especially recall all the propaganda during Desert Storm about "smart bombs" and how they were so accurate we didn't have to blow up entire neighborhoods any more, we could just blow up a single building. A chemical agent or nuclear fallout in Syria could spread to many places that are not involved in the conflict, and that's something the major world actors would like to avoid.
2012-12-06 11:18:41 AM  
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: Why would we fight Assad again?  Oh, because its okay when your president is playing World Policeman.


"Your" president deliberately deceived his own citizens -- and attempted to deceive the world -- into unilaterally initiating an unjustified ground war that lasted a decade or so. "Our" president is considering working with allies if and when Assad actually uses chemical weapons against his own people.

There is a difference and you know it.
2012-12-06 10:57:30 AM  
1 votes:

Steve Zodiac: Because
A) Syria is next to Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey and may attack or destabilize one or more of them.

B) Turkey is a NATO ally and the U.S. is required to come to their aid, Saudi provides oil to much of Western Europe and it would be bad for their economy, and therefore our economy, to have a major disruption in energy supplies, and no US politician dares ignore Israel if he wants to be reelected.


C) The State Department is staffed by Ivy League D&D players and the world is their mothers card table.
2012-12-06 10:51:59 AM  
1 votes:
It's not as much "fighting alongside them" as it is "standing between them and the Syrian Army's stockpile of chemical weapons".
 
Displayed 6 of 6 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report