As most of you are aware, President Obama attacked Libya in order (supposedly) to keep Ghadaffi from slaughtering Libyans. Obama set a precedent in doing so and declared that the attacks by the U.S. were for "humanitarian reasons". My question is, "Don't the Syrian people deserve the same protection from the world's policeman"? When do you think we'll hear from Obama on the Syrian issue? Haunting images of dozens of dead children in Syria, among 90 killed in new regime attack BEIRUT - Gruesome video Saturday showed rows of dead Syrian children lying in a mosque in bloody shorts and T-shirts with gaping head wounds, haunting images of what activists called one of the deadliest regime attacks yet in Syria's 14-month-old uprising. The shelling attack on Houla, a group of villages northwest of the central city of Homs, killed more than 90 people, including at least 32 children under the age of 10, the head of the U.N. observer team in Syria said. The attacks sparked outrage from U.S. and other international leaders, and large protests in the suburbs of Syria's capital of Damascus and its largest city, Aleppo. It also renewed fears of the relevance of a month-old international peace plan that has not stopped almost daily violence. The U.N. denounced the attacks in a statement that appeared to hold President Bashar Assad's regime responsible, and the White House called the violence acts of "unspeakable and inhuman brutality." "This appalling and brutal crime involving indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force is a flagrant violation of international law and of the commitments of theSyrian government to cease the use of heavy weapons in population centres and violence in all its forms," said U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and international envoy Kofi Annan. "Those responsible for perpetrating this crime must be held to account." More than a dozen amateur videos posted online Saturday gave glimpses of the carnage, showing lines of bodies laid out in simple rooms, many with bloody faces, torsos and limbs. In some places, residents put chunks of ice on the bodies to preserve them until burial. One two-minute video shows at least a dozen children lined up shoulder to shoulder on a checkered blanket on what appears to be the floor of a mosque. Blood trickled from one girl's mouth. One boy, appearing to be no more than 8, had his jaw blown off. The video shows flowered blankets and rugs covering several rows of other bodies. Another video posted Saturday showed a mass grave, four bodies wide and dozens of meters (yards) long. Activists from Houla said Saturday that regime forces peppered the area with mortars after large demonstrations against the regime on Friday. That evening, they said, pro-regime fighters known as shabiha stormed the villages, gunning down men in the streets and stabbing women and children in their homes. - - more - - http://news.yahoo.com/haunting-images-dozens-dead-children-syria-among-90-002012082.html
I doubt it to be honest in the same way I doubt our own Prime minister wont do anything other than make speeches, at the moment the most they might do is to funnel funds to the rebels so they can buy arms possibly at a push send in a few non affiliated advisers (the sort who can be denied)
This is a complex question which does not have one answer. Everyone who follows the middle east knows that the Saudi's want a sunni government and the United States and England do whatever the Saudi's want so I think in time the shia's will fall but it is not that easy for Iran could pour troops and terrorist trained by their military into the entire region as well as the trump card that Syria had a deal with Iraq during the second US war with Iraq where gold and non-nuclear weapons of mass destruction was poured into Syria in exchange for a backdoor escape plan for the then ruling Iraq clan. Whick means Syria has an extensive stockpile of weapons of mass destruction that it could release. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/22/assads-fall-could-solve-iraqi-weapons-mystery/ http://pjmedia.com/blog/satellite-photos-support-testimony-that-iraqi-wmd-went-to-syria/
Oh, and as an aside, in case Obama wants to attack Syria, here's some legislation that Democrat Charlie Rangel would like to see passed which could provide plenty of boots on the ground: Americans and Their Military: The Case for Bringing Back the Draft Charles Rangel of New York has been in the news for two reasons in recent years. First, for allegations of corruption concerning a Puerto Rico vacation spot, a story that gave readers of the New York City tabloids an indelible snapshot of a dozing Rangel at the beach. Second, he is in a difficult primary battle in his district. He should be better known for a piece of legislation he has sponsored in several different sessions of Congress, never to any avail. Known as H.R. 5741, it would essentially reinstate a service draft for Americans from the ages of 21 to 42, thus ending the all-volunteer military force that has fought our wars for us since the latter years of Vietnam. It is Memorial Day, the best of moments to weigh how well -- or how poorly -- we apportion the military burdens of defending American interests. (MORE: Women Should Be Required to Register with the Military, Too) Without a draft, we are given a great and dangerous luxury: we are, in the main, able to consign our war-fighting to a largely isolated force of brave volunteers. The military is a noble calling, and many choose to serve for many different reasons. Whether it is because of family tradition or because a recruit has few other options in life for socioeconomic reasons, the result is that the majority of Americans have little direct connection with the military. Without that direct connection, the politics of war are inescapably different than what they would be if the children of the most influential families in communities across America were at risk of being drafted to face fire at the front. It is difficult to imagine that the wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq would have been conducted in the ways they were (and still are) if a large-scale draft had been in effect in America since 2001. (PHOTOS: Battleland Diary) This is a long-running debate in policy circles, and there are sundry studies and proposals about systems of military and civilian national service in exchange for student loans and other GI Bill-type benefits. (The arguments put forward in a 2005 Washington Monthly piece by Phillip Carter and Paul Glastris is a good place to start a study of the question. William F. Buckley Jr. also argued for voluntary service in his book Gratitude.) (MORE: It's Not Just Facebook's C0-Founder Who's Trying to Dodge Taxes) It is true that the military leadership has long opposed a draft, but that view, while important, should not foreclose a debate about the issue. And there is no doubt that we have enough national needs at home, particularly in schools, that a civilian program of service, implemented well, would be a boon for poorer communities. Say a prayer today, then, for the war dead, and for those who are standing watch now. And then tomorrow let's set to work to share the burden of defending what we have, and improving who we are.
Quite different from what US government told us. Syria: anti-government groups committed Houla massacre Reuters – 1 hr 6 mins ago BEIRUT (Reuters) - Syria said on Thursday a preliminary investigation showed that anti-government armed groups committed a massacre last week in Houla, in which 108 people were killed, with the aim of encouraging foreign military intervention against the Syrian government. Brigadier General Qassem Jamal Suleiman, head of the investigation committee formed by the government, said the victims were families "who refused to oppose the government and were at odds with the armed groups". He said many of the victims were relatives of a member of the Syrian parliament. (Reporting by Mariam Karouny; Editing by Kevin Liffey) http://news.yahoo.com/syria-anti-government-groups-committed-houla-massacre-161038724.html
Comrade Obama didn't do anything during the Iranian uprising either. I suppose he simply chooses the leaders he thinks are easy to kill.
SYRIA: US-NATO Supported "Opposition" Commits Extensive War Crimes by Devon DB Global Research, March 20, 2012 Finally, it should be noted that there are many similarities between the Syrian rebels and the Libyan rebels. The Libyan rebels launched a media propaganda war against Gaddafi, must like how Al Jazeera has lied about the ongoing events in Syria. In addition to this, much like the Syrian rebels, the Libyan rebels also committedwar crimes. While there are those who may be pushing for intervention into Syria, they may want to rethink it the situation in light of this new information. The situation may end up much worse as the Libyan rebels were linked to Al Qaeda and the NTC is now going to enact Sharia law. We should not want the same fate for the people of Syria. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29867
We can't approach the Syria situation like we did the Libyan one. Even disregarding the different political natures of the two nations, supporting the rebels in Syria is nowhere near as easy a task as it was in Libya. In Libya, it was possible to support the rebels without any actual invasion by our troops. Not so in Syria. Due to the nature of the fighting, the composition of the groups involved in the fighting, and the areas where fighting is taking place, airstrikes would only be effective somewhat...and civilian casualties would be highly likely. The same issues create problems for supply drops, we would inevitably be unintentionally supplying the side we are against. Then there's the legal issue: Both airstrikes and supply drops can occur only after authorization by, and the airspace deemed a no-fly zone by, the UN ...otherwise America will face harsher critisisms for being too aggressive. The type of fighting is a totally different animal as well. In Libya, Gaddafi clearly stated his intent to wipe out all opposition, be it man, woman, or child...it was going to be outright and wholesale slaughter. Video evidence of this is available online. In Syria, as awful as the killings have been, it's not a wholesale slaughter, it's been a much more targetted striking. The government is targetting the rebels, the rebels are targetting the government, and lately al-Qaeda has been causing trouble as well. For the most part, civilians are not being specifically targetted...with a few exceptions, which is typical in a guerilla war where enemy combatants are difficult to distinguish from civilians...especially in an urban environment. Don't believe that? Ask American troops what they thought about patrolling the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan was like...they'll tell ya.
Although I am extremely wary of talk of an invasion of Syria, there is some evidence of civilians being intentionally targetted...and that bothers me. If the World decided it's time to intervene in Syria, they surely realize that any invasion of the country would be more similar to the invasion of Iraq in it's compexity and duration than the action in Libya.
This is where you guys lose me.........When America intervenes in foreign situations many scream " We are not the world police" , yet when it's politically expediant you want us to intervene........what the F ? I get soooo tired of peoples changing values depending on the letter R or D next to a persons name. You either have standards or ya don't. Don't switch them due to a party....makes you look hollow.
In your absence from the forum, Jack, the liberals here and I had quite a discussion about Obama's intervention in Libya. They all defended his warmongering in Libya while I did not. I don't want Obama to intervene in Syria either, but he DID set a precedent as the world's policeman by bombing them for "humanitarian reasons" (go figure), but somehow Syria is off his radar. The liberals on this forum know that Obama shouldn't intervene, but they're waiting to see what he does before they respond. If Obama does nothing, they'll defend him. If he imposes sanctions, they'll defend him. If he attacks Syria, they'll defend him. If he sends Hitlery Clinton on a "peace" mission (all the while dodging sniper-fire as usual), they'll defend him. If he sends the Navy SEALs to kill Assad, they'll defend him. The liberals here know that I'm yanking their chain, but it's fun and I love to watch them squirm. My point is that Obama was so quick to jump on the UN bandwagon to bomb Libya because the leader there was killing his own people. The same situation is happening in Syria, but so far there's not a peep from Obama. The lack of response really smacks of disingenuousness. Or maybe there was an ulterior motive in waging war on Libya. Who knows? But, between his appearances on The View and singing Al Green songs, Syria appears to be the last thing on Obama's mind.
Not that anybody needs reminding, but Katsung47 is a person who has repeatedly posted stories of how government agencies are stalking him, and controlling the weather where he lives. The source he's using here (Global Research, a site created by Michel Chossudovsky) is a conspiracy (pretty much you name it, they believe it) site. I'm not buying anything they (or Katsung47), are selling.
Jack, what I think is the funniest part of this forum is someone like Coin who can ignore his own double standards to point out other people's perceived double standards. I guess that is pretty much what you are saying. Coin was all over Obama for bombing Libya calling him a war monger, changing his avatar, and criticizing Obama at every turn and now starts a thread criticizing Obama for not bombing Syria as if Libya and Syria are two identical situations. The fact that Libya turned out about as well as could be expected and no American lives were lost seems to be ignored. This is just the most blatant case of his Right-wing hypocrisy but he can rationalize anything to criticize Obama even if it is the polar opposite position he took yesterday. Is it any wonder I just laugh at these Rightwing clowns? Seriously.
Sometimes I am forced to agree with you Jack. We are not the world's policemen but war is good business and we are extremely good salesmen. We don't actually care about spreading Democracy or saving civilians, or getting rid of dictators, we care about selling weapons. Right now Russia makes billions selling weapons to Syria. We would not be attacking Syria some much as we'd be attacking a Russian cash cow. Remember, in Libya, we were the chief arms dealer to Libya and Rummy was even touting our relationship with Libya right up to the end of the Bush Administration. It's all about the weapons.
katsung does have a point about the media "pushing" or "calling" for an intervention in Syria. Although it's framed under a news banner, as coverage of events, it's also a not so subtle call to take action there.
I agree that you have been consistently against interfering in other countries wars, but from the sounds of things, you need to dumb down you language so the left hypocrites can follow you line. Apparently your wording is way over their heads.
