Yeah sure, except your original comparison was "war crime, torture, and oppression of freedom."
So according to you, suspension of certain rights during war time is oppression?
Coming from a vapid partisan hack like yourself, that insult sure is hurtful :sneaky:
Notice you're the only idiot in this thread defending your stupid notions. Even the other big government busybodies have abandoned you here.
That should tell you something, numnuts.
This whole feigned concern for Syria is sickening. Assad has been in power for a long time - started with his father, Hafez al-Assad in 1970. The US gives two shits about dictatorial regimes in other countries and has even abetted many of them, much to the deadly disadvantage to the citizens of those countries. Why does it give a rat's ass now? If you think the US and other Western European countries are 'worried' for the Syrians, you have been snorting those chemicals for too long.
Also, tell me this. If a group of terrorists decide to overthrow the government, what do you expect the government to do? Sit down for tea and biscuits and "chat" with them?
I would love to see what would happen if the right-wing bible-thumping militias in the US, who are armed to the teeth, try to overthrow and "take on" the US government. Perhaps the cabal of human rights quacks who are so busy writing reports on "other" countries and their internal problems would dare to look internally at the "atrocities" of the US government on the "insurgents".
Do people expect the leadership to just step away when a violent group of terrorists claim they want to overthrow the government of an entire country? It is appalling some of you are so naive. Well, not really, I suppose.
I agree fully that wE as humans have a duty to exact justice irrespective of borders, in some circumstances, even if the matter does not directly impact us.
I used to think that about Syria but now I am thinking the country is beyond help. It is cancer now and to touch it is to contract the disease, possibly. I don't want a single penny of my taxes going to the side of any group, supporting them in anyway, if they are related to that video I linked to earlier today.
Yeah... You're right. The United States should sit back and do nothing.
Let Russia sell their arms to Syria, it's not our problem.
And then, when Assad crushes the rebels and does another massive ethnic cleansing, we'll have an autocratic regime as a trading partner in the region!
Gosh, there's just so much win there - how in the world could you think that's a bad idea?
Last Friday, thousands of Libyans marched toward the besieged Foreign Ministry to confront the armed militias. Those I spoke with said they were marching for the principles of due process and democracy.
And what's truly amazing about the effects of freedom we see in Libya? Try this:...their signs and banners bore witness to the idea that changes in government should come through legal, peaceful means, not by armed intimidation.
Arab citizens who cared enough about democracy and freedom that they marched against armed militias, and the militias fled.By late Friday evening, the militias had fled; by Saturday night, the ministries had returned to business.
It's interesting to me how you try to describe the situation in the Middle East in a certain light, and yet you link to an artricle describing Libya from February 17, 2012 - barely 5 months after the death of Gaddafi? How about try something a *little* more current, like May 16, 2013: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...60c0c8-bd8e-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html
What's disturbing about your point of view is that, taken at face value, one would think that it's better for the United States to sit back and do nothing to aid the building of democracies, because that would just result in utter failure and chaos. Except that the reality of the situation is there have been amazing results from people given the increased freedom with Gaddafi gone. Let's take the example of the article itself:
And what's truly amazing about the effects of freedom we see in Libya? Try this:
Arab citizens who cared enough about democracy and freedom that they marched against armed militias, and the militias fled.
That inspirational scene, playing out as it did, must be a bitter pill for your cynical mind to swallow, I imagine. How could such a thing have even happened, if the United States, the United Nations, and all the allies of democracy did nothing, as you foolishly suggest?
Think about that for a while, then perhaps you will arrive at a more optimistic conclusion.
*edit* Because it's being discussed: how much American blood was spilled in Libya to bring down Gaddafi, and how many taxpayer dollars were spent?
Lol, you conveniently ignored the rest of my post while linking an opinion piece while conveniently forgetting that just a few short years ago, our government was praising Gaddafi.
And your point is that when Gaddafi renounced his nuclear ambitions we should have insulted him instead? :awe:
No, my point is that we have this disturbing trend of 1) backing the wrong guys or 2) backing someone and then throwing them to the wolves, as was the case with Gaddafi and Mubarak. Is it any wonder Syria or North Korea won't cooperate with us? They just have to look back in the last couple of years and see what happened to Gaddafi and Mubarak to know what happens to "friends" of the US.
Looking at a similar situation to Syria, what did our support of rebels in Afghanistan get us? The Mujahideen went on to form the Taliban and Al Qaeda and Afghanistan is still a disaster 34 years after the Soviets initially invaded.
No arms has directly supplied to Syria from the US, but so far the US has supplied medicines and intelligence. US allies such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey has supported the rebels directly with intelligence, arms, money, and allows (foreign) fighters to enter Syria.Isn't it a fact the US has already sent arms and/or supplies to rebels in Syria?
We don't have a good understanding of who the rebels are and what their goals are - Assad claims they're backed by Al Quaeda and trying to overthrow the govnernment. Assad did also allow for religious freedom, unlike most dictators. He claims the US and other Western countries cast him as a dictator because Syria, along with Iran and North Korea, are the few countries left they have little to no influence over.
At this point I don't feel I trust anything the news or politicians in this country say about Syria.
Israel did just carry out airstrikes there, and usually we back Israel for better or worse. Which is stupid.
But anyways, I'm pretty tired of arguing about it now, so I'm quitting.
Wow. He gets tired arguing and quits, while expecting others to risk their lives over this.
He's nothing more than a trolling cowardly piece of dog shit.
The way I see it is this, the middle east needs to sort their own crap out. Just like we, the west, spent the better half of two millenia fighting endless wars, so too will the middle east until the population as a whole becomes more educated, more secularized, and more tolerant. Some of us Americans seem to forget that our freedom, and the concept of freedom itself, has been bought and paid for by the blood of hundreds of millions who have died, American or not. We cannot simply waltz in and teach that. It has to be learned, and it has to be learned the hard way. Until then, the best we can do is show compassion, and sometimes that means turning our heads the other way when a humanitarian crisis arises. Even I hate to admit it,.but it's the bitter pill they have to swallow. What I mean by that is, that war didn't start on it's own. Ultimately they picked up weapons against their fellow countrymen.
Just like the west finally learned, is all that war, death, and suffering worth it? They'll learn it eventually.