Should the United States intervene in Syria

[Renegade Island]

And you would rather have tens times more people dead for no greater crime than living in Iraq. Congratulations, you're a proponent of mass-murder.

Who died so the people of Iraq could participate in free and democratic elections, have access to variety of independent TV and radio channels and newspaper, who have liberty to voice their opinion, assemble and found organizations and political parties.

You oppose all things. Why? Why do you hate the freedom that the Iraqi people have achieved?

I'm sure those millions of dead Iraqi's are enjoying their independent TV shows.

[Hippostania]

Suspected. Without due process. Without trial. With heavy civilian casualties. With no legal repurcussions.

Sounds like oppression to me.

So you'd rather have another 9/11?

Well that's just great.

[Nua Corda]

But they didn't "die for liberty". They were killed by your "greatest nation on earth".

Civilian casualties are unfortunate but they are unavoidable. You can't wage war without killing some civilians. These people gave their lives so their countrymen could be free.

Prove that honor means something. Prove that there is a consistent, objective reason for using "honor" as a calculus.

Oh god, not this anti-realist bullshit again.. Honor means that you've made a great sacrifice for something good. Like dying for liberty.

If the liberation of slaves was accomplished by carpet-bombing slaves and confederates alike, then killing and raping the slaves and torturing southern whites who had nothing to do with the war, and if it ultimately did nothing to actually liberate slaves, then sure, maybe you can compare them.

Yes, all American soldiers killed and raped Iraqis. Your blatant hypocrisy and anti-Americanism is showing.

All Middle-Eastern people are now automatically terrorists, murderers and islamofascist scum? "K, all Conservatives are now automatically facist, racist, homophobic inbred bucktoothed developmental disabled hicks. See the fallacy here?

Of course not, but the people in that prison are.

They didn't chose this, they are not free now, and you have consistently failed to prove the contrary. If I line up a bunch of civilians, shoot them dead, and then topple the dictatorship originally oppressing them, having toppled the dictatorship does not make my action any less horrific and blameworthy.

Uhm, no. Check the dictionary; it means having done something that gains you the respect of a group of your peers, usually by conforming to a societal norm. And I'm not the anti-realist, last time I checked I didn't live in a fantasy world were the US is the world's Sir Lancelot. Not to mention that even your definition is highly subjective.

I never said that; you're strawmanning here. What I said was that that behavior did occur, on a large scale.

Can you prove that? Where they given a trial, and sentenced by a jury of their peers? Was their guilt proved beyond reasonable doubt? Produce the court records to prove this, please.

Also, kindly respond to my post on the state of the US military.

[The Huskar Social Union]

See if i sold everything i had, and my family did the same, we would not have enough to provide for a single family in that regard, why? because im not rich like you. My family does not even own this house, we have to rent it, and we can barely afford it, along with many other things we have, but i still contribute, i give a few pounds from my savings now and then when i am able. See you picked something that you knew i wouldn't be able to do much in as your argument of defense, but i do my best, more that what you ever will do, you are more than able to do what you call for, this so called campaign of freedom and justice, but you wont do it yourself.

There's the difference between you and I. I Try to do what i stand for, you don't even have to the stomach to try and do what you stand for.

You couldn't do much if you sold all your possessions away and gave them away, but you could do something. It wouldn't be much, but you could it do. I couldn't do much either as a soldier, I'm just a single person.

So am i, i couldnt do much giving to charity and helping others, but i do it anyway, you couldnt do much as a soldier or a mercenary, or a freedom fighter, but you could try, But you wont. Your argument falls like a house made out of cards.

[Tmutarakhan]

Yes, we're only interested in Syria's oil because the US totally has way less oil than Syria /sarcasm.

If we wanted Syria's oil, we probably could have just purchased it, just like all of our allies were doing before the Arab Spring.



Also the Blue Helmets have such a stellar track record of preventing mass killings. Like that time in Srebrenica where they bravely watched Serbian military and paramilitary forces murder thousands of Bosniaks, or that time in Rwanda where they did pretty much the same thing again.



What Libyan revolution were you watching that I missed?

It's not about being able to buy the oil, it's about controlling the sales of the oil. That's the only way that the US Empire can continue the petrodollar, as other countries are openly talking about trading oil in other currencies.

The US is making a last ditch attempt to grab all the remaining oil rich nations to prevent collapse.

Syria is not an "oil rich" country. It ranks 33rd in the world, behind Ecuador and Thailand.

[Kemalist]

He can, especially given the backing of Russian, Iranian and Chinese support and the fact that Turkish army is currently so miserable both technically and psychologically due to more than half of its experienced notable generals and officers being in prison.

Just as America didn't want to start WW3 when Russia intervened in Georgia, why would Russia and China not do the same in this?

They would not need to directly involve in, but a high amount of weapon and material aid would be enough to crush the miserable Turkish army.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Suspected. Without due process. Without trial. With heavy civilian casualties. With no legal repurcussions.

Sounds like oppression to me.

So you'd rather have another 9/11?

Well that's just great.

False dichotomy is false.

Here's a crazy idea: you're less likely to radicalise ordinary Muslims in Waziristan, causing more terrorists, if you don't blow up the house next door to them during a terrorist hunt and kill children by accident.

[Al-Faisal]

And you would rather have tens times more people dead for no greater crime than living in Iraq. Congratulations, you're a proponent of mass-murder.

Who died so the people of Iraq could participate in free and democratic elections, have access to variety of independent TV and radio channels and newspaper, who have liberty to voice their opinion, assemble and found organizations and political parties.

You oppose all things. Why? Why do you hate the freedom that the Iraqi people have achieved?

Because the Arab Spring came anyway, and all this death by America could have been avoided or mitigated. It was not America's place or their job, yet they came and committed atrocities and called them liberty and freedom.

You don't know or understand any of these things because you live in a distant (Fin)land and have no connection to the places involved except the fantasies you develop for them.

[Varijnland]

So this Saddam fella..................nice guy then?

Strange thing. Despite being a dictator who used chemical weapons the Liberty-Loving United States gave him, fewer people died during his era than did during the illegal American invasion and occupation.

No, he was an ass. Sometimes it is neccessary to remove a tyrant so that democracy can be secured. Removing the tyrant often requires conflict. Conflicts are not nice. War is not nice. But sometimes it is neccessary.

[Al-Faisal]

Al-Faisal debating with Hippostania; it's like Alien vs Predator- no one wins, only xenophobia.

You keep trying to interject. Do you require something?

[Varijnland]

Suspected. Without due process. Without trial. With heavy civilian casualties. With no legal repurcussions.

Sounds like oppression to me.

So you'd rather have another 9/11?

Well that's just great.

I don't think anyone here would want another 9/11.

[SD_Film Artists]

Al-Faisal debating with Hippostania; it's like Alien vs Predator- no one wins, only xenophobia.

You keep trying to interject. Do you require something?

A stop to xenophobia and hypocrisy, please.

[Al-Faisal]

Strange thing. Despite being a dictator who used chemical weapons the Liberty-Loving United States gave him, fewer people died during his era than did during the illegal American invasion and occupation.

No, he was an ass. Sometimes it is neccessary to remove a tyrant so that democracy can be secured. Removing the tyrant often requires conflict. Conflicts are not nice. War is not nice. But sometimes it is neccessary.

And this was not one of those times it was necessary. You're account of him being "an ass" does not make the truth of the barbarism of the invasion and occupation any less so.

[Oceanic people]

unilaterally. However, as part of NATO to secure our ally Turkey, yes the USA should!

[Al-Faisal]

You keep trying to interject. Do you require something?

A stop to xenophobia and hypocrisy, please.

Then I look forward to you saying something to Hippostania instead of just me. Unless you think only I am "xenophobic and hypocritical."

[Dilange]

Suspected. Without due process. Without trial. With heavy civilian casualties. With no legal repurcussions.

Sounds like oppression to me.

So you'd rather have another 9/11?

Well that's just great.

Bad fear tactic is bad.

It still doesnt excuse the right to claim martial law without court rulings. If you truly believed int he American Constitution, then you beleive everyone should have a fair trail with an attorney, and with a jury.

[Dilange]

A stop to xenophobia and hypocrisy, please.

Then I look forward to you saying something to Hippostania instead of just me. Unless you think only I am "xenophobic and hypocritical."

You both are.

[SD_Film Artists]

Then I look forward to you saying something to Hippostania instead of just me. Unless you think only I am "xenophobic and hypocritical."

You both are.

This ^

[Aethelstania]

Not the US independently. It needs to be NATO together countries cooperating together will ensure a quicker, smoother end to Assads regime. Fuck Russia and China if they don't want to cooperate and fuck the United Nations their to slow. We need to get in and get out as quick and clean as you can in a intervention

[Kemalist]

unilaterally. However, as part of NATO to secure our ally Turkey, yes the USA should!

Secure from what ? Syria is our sister.

[Varijnland]

No, he was an ass. Sometimes it is neccessary to remove a tyrant so that democracy can be secured. Removing the tyrant often requires conflict. Conflicts are not nice. War is not nice. But sometimes it is neccessary.

And this was not one of those times it was necessary. You're account of him being "an ass" does not make the truth of the barbarism of the invasion and occupation any less so.

And your rambling on about the "occupation" does not make Saddam Hussein any less of an ass.

[SD_Film Artists]

Just as America didn't want to start WW3 when Russia intervened in Georgia, why would Russia and China not do the same in this?

They would not need to directly involve in, but a high amount of weapon and material aid would be enough to crush the miserable Turkish army.

Russia is already bankrolling Assad's forces.

[Hollorous]

No, he was an ass. Sometimes it is neccessary to remove a tyrant so that democracy can be secured. Removing the tyrant often requires conflict. Conflicts are not nice. War is not nice. But sometimes it is neccessary.

And this was not one of those times it was necessary. You're account of him being "an ass" does not make the truth of the barbarism of the invasion and occupation any less so.

I don't see why there needs to be a competition between the Saddam-era and the occupation-era to decide which was worse. Saddam ruled and it was terrible. Some say that his regime killed 240,000 people since 1979, but those numbers are just speculation. Saddam fell and the ensuing war was terrible. Standards of living plummeted every further, safety went out the window, and at least 100,000 civilians died in the fighting (but it's possible that the real body count is even higher) and there's been nearly a million refugees. It's been one long train of suck. It's right to criticize the invasion, but wrong, I think, to make excuses for a dictator while doing so. I honestly don't think that's what you were doing, however.

[Al-Faisal]

You both are.

You complain at Hippostania's attidues towards the middle east, and yet you chose to define a complicated war in a single picture as if it's that simple, as if you're saying that everyone is like that. Spouting the typical cry of "Imperialism" while I suspect that its' just code for your xenophobia or anglophobia.

I do not mean to define the conflict with a single picture, but I use it to show his black and white view is not that simple. I am not xenophobic or Anglophobic at all. I am attending university in the United States and have a love of much British history. Anything negative I say I intend as against their current or recent governments and their actions taken in Iraq.

If you are American or English and I have offended you I offer apologies and hope you accept.

But Hippostania seems to genuinely treat peoples of Iraq likes stupid baboons in need of upraising by America.

[Al-Faisal]

And this was not one of those times it was necessary. You're account of him being "an ass" does not make the truth of the barbarism of the invasion and occupation any less so.

And your rambling on about the "occupation" does not make Saddam Hussein any less of an ass.

How would it? It puts the two eras in perspective.