The Official Syria (and all things about it) Thread

[Blasveck]

Then they should fucking realize the situation they put themselves in.

Its their choice to stay.

They should understand the situation and the consequences.

In Orthodoxy, it's considered an honour to be a martyr for your faith. To put in perspective, it's like taking a bullet for your wife (or husband).

Then they shouldn't complain in the first place. They have no reason to.

[Frisivisia]

The problem with the UN World Police, of course, being that if Russia and China decide that a genocide works for them, the UN can just not get involved. I feel a lot better with America as the world's major source of hard power.

Another good point, but as I've said countless times we shouldn't jump straight to force and military intervention.

You don't think we've tried getting them to negotiate? You think this is our first option?

[Dangelia]

In Orthodoxy, it's considered an honour to be a martyr for your faith.

Which is fucking batshit insane and dangerous.

I sincerely hope so. US is about to go to war with a country in the Middle East. Again. I'd certainly want to see the actual reason. But if the government fails to trust the people with actual data, why should the people trust the government, that has a past history of lying when it comes to wars in the Middle East?

Neville, is that you?

It's not dangerous when you end up in heaven. It's all worth it.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

You said the same thing in 2003, but with Iraq, Bush and Cheney.

Admit it.

Bush and Cheney were unelected hawks, but at the time, that was the best intelligence the American people were given. One shitty war brokered by shitty people does not an invalidation of the concept of US intervention make.

There were people who weren't warhawks that saw the same intelligence and thought, "Hey, you know, maybe we should do something about Iraq."

Turns out the CIA took a dump in a paper bag, lit it on fire, and left in on the doorstep of the UN.

[The Scientific States]

Another good point, but as I've said countless times we shouldn't jump straight to force and military intervention.

You don't think we've tried getting them to negotiate? You think this is our first option?

I suppose it's not.

Goodness, you've convinced me more and more that intervention may be a good idea.

[Shofercia]

You said the same thing in 2003, but with Iraq, Bush and Cheney.

Admit it.

Bush and Cheney were unelected hawks, but at the time, that was the best intelligence the American people were given. One shitty war brokered by shitty people does not an invalidation of the concept of US intervention make.

With the exception of the word shift, and Obama being actually elected, how's this any different? Oh, and who did Obama go up against? McShithead, and Mitt "My Plan is Secret" Romney. The Democrats would do well to remember why Romney lost. Hint: it was due to his secrecy.

[The Scientific States]

Which is fucking batshit insane and dangerous.

Neville, is that you?

It's not dangerous when you end up in heaven. It's all worth it.

The topic isn't about Christianity. Lets change it back to Syria.

[Dangelia]

In Orthodoxy, it's considered an honour to be a martyr for your faith. To put in perspective, it's like taking a bullet for your wife (or husband).

Then they shouldn't complain in the first place. They have no reason to.

That doesn't mean they want to die.

[Srboslavija]

You said the same thing in 2003, but with Iraq, Bush and Cheney.

Admit it.

Bush and Cheney were unelected hawks, but at the time, that was the best intelligence the American people were given. One shitty war brokered by shitty people does not an invalidation of the concept of US intervention make.

One shitty war?



You've seemingly learnt nothing from it, keep calm and -

[Neoconstantius]

Rebels attack Christians just because of their faith. Therefore, America cannot support the rebels.

All X=Y

Two rebels kill Christians, therefore all rebels are the same am I right?

I don't support the rebels, but I support the innocent people of Syria being affected by all this crap.

It'll be even worse if the US uses military force, it'll just hurt more people and devastate more. But we can't sit by and let innocents die. Something must be done, just not military force.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html
http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Christ ... story.html
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/origina ... dered.html
http://www.christianpost.com/news/as-we ... re-103323/
http://www.scpr.org/news/2013/09/02/390 ... us-attack/

Clearly, these are not isolated incidents. Why must the US support the apparent lesser of two evils? Either we support the rabid Islamists or we support the brutal dictator. Both horrible choices, and there is no indication that the use of force or coercion won't produce more innocent victims.

[Democratic Koyro]

But because the UN does not have the powers to be the World police, we have to.

I'm all for the UN having a real army, one that can stop this kind of shit and kill the monsters that live in the shit holes like Syria or Sudan. I want America to take a breath and relax from fighting for once.

But till that day happens, the US arm forces have to do what no one else will do.

The problem with the UN World Police, of course, being that if Russia and China decide that a genocide works for them, the UN can just not get involved. I feel a lot better with America as the world's major source of hard power.

How about we don't have one enermous monsterous military riding around the world totally unchallenged? Let's not have US military force dictating the legitimacy of other governments.

[Warda]

Bush and Cheney were unelected hawks, but at the time, that was the best intelligence the American people were given. One shitty war brokered by shitty people does not an invalidation of the concept of US intervention make.

One shitty war?



You've seemingly learnt nothing from it, keep calm and -

you forgot reproduce

[Orcoa]

The problem with the UN World Police, of course, being that if Russia and China decide that a genocide works for them, the UN can just not get involved. I feel a lot better with America as the world's major source of hard power.

Another good point, but as I've said countless times we shouldn't jump straight to force and military intervention.

Sometimes to not use force allows people like Assad or Omar al-Bashir to get away with murder and crimes agasint Humanity.

I would hate to see the world if we decided to not fight in WW2 agasint Hitler because the Anti-War groups got their way.

War is a horrible terrible thing that should never been used...but the world is never perfect so when duty calls, we have to choose either to fight or to allow monsters to get away with their crimes...I would pick fighting everytime.

[Blasveck]

Then they shouldn't complain in the first place. They have no reason to.

That doesn't mean they want to die.

I didnt say that.

I'm saying that if they willingly stay in a situation that they know is deadly, and they're even praised as martyrs for it, they have absolutely no reason to complain.

They make their choice. They can either leave with the other refugees, or stay and understand and accept the consequences of said decision.

Granted, nobody should have to die. But that's the reality of the situation that they live in.

[Neoconstantius]

It's not dangerous when you end up in heaven. It's all worth it.

The topic isn't about Christianity. Lets change it back to Syria.

Syrian Christianity is inherently affected by the civil war, it's wholly relevant.

[Shofercia]

The primary sources for Assad using chemical weapons are... those who want to depose him? Lolwut.

Or maybe we want to depose him because we found out he had chemical weapons.

Either way, I can't tell whether you just don't understand international politics and intelligence or you're being purposefully obtuse due to your vision being clouded by bad memories of Iraq.

US knew he had chemical weapons, way before the war started. The casus belli is that he used chemical weapons. The he has chemical weapons casus belli was already used against Saddam. It's not something that can be reused. I want to understand why the fuck the US is attacking yet another country in the Middle East, again. "We said so" sounds a lot like Romney's economy argument, "money will appear, trust me".

[The Scientific States]

Another good point, but as I've said countless times we shouldn't jump straight to force and military intervention.

Sometimes to not use force allows people like Assad or Omar al-Bashir to get away with murder and crimes agasint Humanity.

I would hate to see the world if we decided to not fight in WW2 agasint Hitler because the Anti-War groups got their way.

War is a horrible terrible thing that should never been used...but the world is never perfect so when duty calls, we have to choose either to fight or to allow monsters to get away with their crimes...I would pick fighting everytime.

You're right for the most part.

But I'm still sticking to the belief that war should be last option.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

The problem with the UN World Police, of course, being that if Russia and China decide that a genocide works for them, the UN can just not get involved. I feel a lot better with America as the world's major source of hard power.

How about we don't have one enermous monsterous military riding around the world totally unchallenged? Let's not have US military force dictating the legitimacy of other governments.

I made the somewhat facetious assertion a couple dozen pages back that the US should bomb the snot out of Assad, then throw a coup if any radical group took over during the vacuum.

[Dangelia]

The topic isn't about Christianity. Lets change it back to Syria.

Syrian Christianity is inherently affected by the civil war, it's wholly relevant.

Syriac Christianity. Ther's a difference.

[The Republic of Lanos]

Killing thousands in a civil war isn't a good reason to do something?

[Orcoa]

The problem with the UN World Police, of course, being that if Russia and China decide that a genocide works for them, the UN can just not get involved. I feel a lot better with America as the world's major source of hard power.

How about we don't have one enermous monsterous military riding around the world totally unchallenged? Let's not have US military force dictating the legitimacy of other governments.

So you are ok with governments that are run by people like Omar al-Bashir, Pol Pot, etc. because they are the "legitimate" government?

Sorry, when a government starts to murder its own people over trivial things like Religion, politics, or whatever, it lose its legitimacy.

[Democratic Koyro]

Bush and Cheney were unelected hawks, but at the time, that was the best intelligence the American people were given. One shitty war brokered by shitty people does not an invalidation of the concept of US intervention make.

One shitty war?



You've seemingly learnt nothing from it, keep calm and -

"Do what america says or die!! in the name of freedumb!"

When is Obama getting his shitty peace prize revoked? No one deserves it less. bombing of Libya, terror drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan etc. and now potential bombing of Syria. Oh, and upscaling in Afghanistan.

[Neoconstantius]

Syrian Christianity is inherently affected by the civil war, it's wholly relevant.

Syriac Christianity. Ther's a difference.

I was referring to Syrian Christianity in general, not just Syriac Orthodoxy.

[Democratic Koyro]

Killing thousands in a civil war isn't a good reason to do something?

You're allowed to have a war, but you're not allowed to kill people. You have to shout slogans at each other.

[Shofercia]

I sincerely hope so. US is about to go to war with a country in the Middle East. Again. I'd certainly want to see the actual reason. But if the government fails to trust the people with actual data, why should the people trust the government, that has a past history of lying when it comes to wars in the Middle East?

Neville, is that you?

Neville had a coalition ready to go, against a clear aggressor. It was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Hitler was guilty, and Czechs and Slovaks were innocent. All I'm asking for, is the same standard of proof. But you're not giving that to me. All you're saying is "I said so, trust me!" That's not going to win my support.