We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

john brown • 4 years ago

*Just nine percent support intervention. Even if the use of chemical weapons is proven, just 25 percent of Americans would support intervention.*
Why would you change your mind on how many people support intervention. Is it nine percent or twenty-five.

Dee Baig • 4 years ago

A thought-provoking post! An eye-opening point for the world especially for U.S that what we are inculcating in the new generation. They are teaching us and we are still unable to get it??

We don’t want more wars. We have had it enough. History is yelling not to write another account of war. It reminds me Jonathan Swift who wrote “Gulliver’s Travels” to make man learn what he is doing in the name of progress. He has created weapons to kill his own race. This is why Mark Twain says whatever man is, he is not a rational animal.


Jaye Harding • 4 years ago

Yes, the call to intercede in Syria's internal problems sounds all too familiar from many other conflicts in which we've engaged: such as the invasion of Iraq. Many here in the US knew before hand--others finally realized later--that the reason given was not the truth. As much as I've not been able align my political sentiments with Sarah Palin I have to admit that I do agree with her comment regarding Syria: "Let Allah sort it out"

Why is it that "we" can always find funding for war, but not for more pressing domestic concerns that would be beneficial for Americans right here in America? If those people who advocate war want to fight let them go: "Do not ask anyone to risk life or limb unless you're willing to do the same: lead by example!"

If the US were to intervene it will very well be a waste of America's military personnel and resources. However, don't get me wrong: I'm not apathetic about the lives being ruined in Syria or anywhere else in the world at all, but this is Syria's problem or is it? What's the "real reason" for the US to get involved?

real fakintired • 4 years ago

There's a 12th one: Syrians are respectful and respected people, cultured, responsible and civilized, not to mention savvy and intelligent. For all those reasons, we should allow them to kill each other until nobody remains alive. Nobody has the right to interfere with the internal affairs of any other sovereign nation, specially with all those nice attributes.

In case they succeed with their decimation goals, the empty land could be then be given by the UN to Hamas and Hezbollah, also respectful and respected people, cultured, responsible and civilized, not to mention savvy and intelligent. The place could be called Hambollah.

In case they decide to continue with the syrian tradition, then the UN can suggest that the Iranians and the Saudis take over. The place could be called Saudran. It could happen, by miracle of course, that they will decide to incinerate each other. What can we do? No intervention!!! undoubtedly they are also respectful and respected people, cultured, responsible and civilized, not to mention savvy and intelligent.

Since we have almost an endless supply of respectful and respected people, cultured, responsible and civilized, not to mention savvy and intelligent, the area can become an anthropological site where scholars can learn how to become respectful and respected people, cultured, responsible and civilized, not to mention savvy and intelligent since we know that Islam is the religion of peace.

Then, the MF-SHs will undoubtedly blame the Jews, but we are used to it. Then the cycle will start all over as has been happening for thousands of years.

grannysm • 4 years ago

There are many lessons to be learned from the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. And a great many of those lessons were learned by the men and women who went to fight and die. Let us pray that ALL our leaders attend to those lessons, and to the Constitution of the United States. And, we pray, NO MORE ILLEGAL, IMMORAL AND UNETHICAL WARS. We can't afford another, psychically, morally, fiscally, emotionally.

notta_lackey • 4 years ago

That's enough reasons. Plus 10.

Gcynic • 4 years ago

An interesting assessment of the situation. Further to Paragraph 8, the author omits to says that the main beneficiary of US military action would be Israel which would be delighted to see Iran dragged into a war and give them the opportunity to "have a go" at them. Why have Israeli fighter-bombers been practicing long-range strikes in a joint exercise with the Bulgarian Air Force? If Assad was not responsible for the gas-attack and it was not the "rebels", could it have been anyone else who might benefit? The plot thickens........

grannysm • 4 years ago

Agreed - let's not fight the fight that Israel would like to see fought.

GusFarmer • 4 years ago

Likewise, the Saudis want this fight too. They've wanted Assad ousted for years simply because he's not Wahhabi. They're very well armed (having bought billions in weapons from us), but would rather fund Jabhat al-Nusra and encourage US to fight their wars for them. If we really wanted to promote democracy in any way other than propaganda, THEY'D be the regime we'd target for "regime change."

George Renaud • 4 years ago

War criminals only think in the short term. They are so involved in criminal acts that they just keep committing more criminal acts. Congress must stop funding the criminals or else be held responsible too.

Guest • 4 years ago
grannysm • 4 years ago

"The Syrians"? No, SOME Syrians, who may have wanted to incite the kinds of sentiments in the US that would eventuate in bombings and attacks. Let's not play into the ploy.

notta_lackey • 4 years ago

Yes. The key word in your post is "allow". Actually, that is also a bad word because it implies we have some right to decision making regarding their country. We don't.

Judgeforyourself37 • 4 years ago

It may be all fruitless, but we could, along with other nations, try diplomacy before we start another war.
If we do go in to Syria, we should absolutely not go in alone, or we shall be seen as no better than the Assad regime, if indeed, it IS the Assad regime using the chemical weapons!

Vaughn Hopkins • 4 years ago

There are no probable outcomes from the US attacking Syria that are to the benefit of the US people. There are many, many probable outcomes that are detrimental to us, from exacerbating the conflict between Arab states and Israel, to the loss of many US lives, to a widened war over all of the Middle East. In fact, if you think about it, the only positive thing that will happen if we go ahead with the attack is that Obama will believe he really taught Assad to respect him. The rational decision would be to call off the attack while it is still possible.

Daniel Brady • 4 years ago

To Eric and anyone else for that matter. Look back over the last 50 or 60
years. The American people have been lied into many wars. Vietnam,
Iraq, Afghanistan are only the big blobs on that radar. Places such as Libya, most of the nations in central and sough America, south asia and the muddle east are much
less known. We’ve supported dozens of horrific tin pot dictators over those decades and millions have died as a result. We have become the world’s pariah state and a global bully. Now we are being told, horror of horrors that some dictator, one that we don’t support, has gassed his people. When Saddam Hussein did that, with our knowledge, supply and support, we said nothing. When the Israelis used forbidden weapons in their attack on Lebanon, we said nothing. When we dropped tons of poisonous, life ruining chemicals on Vietnam damaging millions of lives – including hundreds of thousands of our own troops, we said nothing - to top that off we are being told “the truth” and are now preparing yet another war. If the Syrians did use chemical weapons, and lets just say they did, and the US feels it’s time to punish this outrage, then who will punish the US for its long, long history of outrages? Oh, that’s
right, no one. We’re the hyper power, the biggest stick on the block and no one, but no one, can tell us anything. The American people are culpable as war criminals if this war goes forward. Oh, by the way, it could get real messy and real big unless things are done exactly right – knowing how the US does thing that is not at all reassuring.

Hazel Heinze • 4 years ago

Yes--who will punish US for drones, torture, invading sovereign countries, overthrowing democratically elected leaders, backing despotic dictators, etc. Like you said, we've got the biggest stick, so "we" can do what "we" want. The trouble is, a lot of "us" DON'T want all this war, & there's not a blooming thing I can see that we can do about it.

Martin • 4 years ago

This is not really a civil war but a conflict engineered by foreign interests who have no reservations about paying al Qaeda affiliated terrorists to advance their agenda. The charge that the Assad government reacted with violence to the initial peaceful protests is suspicious and could well have been a false flag operation to demonize his administration by the same actors who just happened to have tons of weaponry and billions of dollars on hand to finance the revolt. It was a well planned act of aggression against the peaceful, secular people of Syria.
And let us not pretend that the USA was not somehow involved in the plan.

mlredmond • 4 years ago

The real problem is about their natural gas and the news has
not been telling the truth behind this possible war, just as we were never told
about the real truth behind any of the wars such as Iraq. The Vietnam
was about the drug trade opening up for the dealers in that part of the world
and not what we were told.

If we want peace than we do not attack, we stay peaceful. Let it begin with me.

Eric • 4 years ago

That's right, we shouldn't impose any material penalty on the Assad regime; too dangerous, too unpredictable.
Yes, we should let him understand that there is no material consequence to his continued use of sarin gas to kill civilian populations of any errant towns or cities that he can't control. Then he will in fact wipe out all the rebels in short order; then we will have Assad and Hezbollah victorious, consolidating the power block of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, the last of which already militarily dominates Lebanon - that block controlled by Iran. Then all of that alliance can concentrate on Israel.
The Israeli's sad to say, are not likely to heed your pacifist wisdom. They will not tolerate that alliance, with newly realized permission to use chemical weapons, aiming them at their population. Then you will have Israel doing what it can to wipe out the Iranian-Syrian-Hezbollah chemical weapon capability with their own campaign of air strikes. (And do you suppose that the Obama administration will be able to resist the Israel lobby in the US to aid that campaign?) Then .....?
How smart to avoid needlessly escalating the situation now by simply abstaining from any material penalty to Assad's gassing women and children.
Maybe if we just talk to him some more he'll come around......
Yes, indeed, given the choice of a) wiping out all the rebels and consolidating his place in the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah arc of power, and b) agreeing to share power with rebels groups that are profoundly opposed to him and his clique and Iranian dominance -- of course he'll chose b, won't he?

opit • 4 years ago

The behaviour of similar so called rebel groups in Libya should give one pause : cannibalism, torture, genocide of blacks.... And Iran is the one calling for nuclear disarmament, as it has for years. Nasty pacifists ! Plus Russia has not been silent on their plans to actively work against military aggression. All of this fits very well with the stated plans of groups flaunting plans to rewrite the map of oil producing countries http://www.oilempire.us/new... 'pacifists' responsible for the murders of not just hundreds of thousands but millions of Iraqis and Afghans http://www.justforeignpolic... ( especially if we count Charlie Wilson's War and the effects of sanctions http://www.progressive.org/... )

Martin • 4 years ago

Assad's continued use of Sarin gas? Excuse me but that is merely an allegation and not something we know to be true by a careful examination of the facts. The USA tried to short circuit an investigation in this case just like we did before the attack of Iraq over alleged weapons of mass destruction. There were none.
And it was the rebels who were caught by the police in Turkey with 4,5 pounds of sarin material not Assad. Stop making reckless assumptions. The truth will come out eventually.

Gcynic • 4 years ago

Truth come out? Will it? Shall we ever know the truth about JFK, MLK, Marilyn Monroe, 9/11? The criminals behind these events must think the general public are stupid when it is perfectly obvious that we were not told the truth.

Vaughn Hopkins • 4 years ago

And, don't forget how good we all will feel, watching US missiles hit buildings in Syria, making loud noises and pretty fires. Many of us will experience some of the best orgasms we have ever had as a result.