• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Syria: Why should I Care?

Have they classified the Salafists as terrorists yet? What about the MB?

They have not even decided why a gov't take over by the military in Egypt is not a coup. Some questions are simply not allowed to be "officially" asked. ;)
 
Aren't we being told, by Obama, that they already did?

Assad is a terrorist. There's no denying that - he gassed his own civilians to maintain political power.
 
This is getting sad. What kind of debate is this?

It's your form of debate. You usually come down to ad homs all the time with no substance. You try to post evidence without knowing what evidence means and just post statements. You endorse murder levels close to that under Saddam and destroying families and lives while pretending you're advocating some greater cause. And when push comes to shove, you can only attack the poster. Your style of debate, you should like it.

10-20K/year death rate, you exalt this as a good thing and proper response to actions by others that have no impact on the US. If you're going to call for all this interventionism, you should at least know what you're calling for.
 
Well, there is also that one glove one size fits all approach that gets sported as well.

Bomb them all and let god sort it out?
 
Assad is a terrorist. There's no denying that - he gassed his own civilians to maintain political power.

A brutal oppressive dictator, for sure. But terrorist? that's got to be stretching the term to unexplored limits...

Paul
 
No, it's not. Stand by your own statements.

Yes, it is. All you can do is pick out little sentences and avoid the entirety of the post so you can make snide little comments, call people "truthers" and other dishonest attacks against character. This is all well within your playbook, you should like it.

10-20K/year death rate, you exalt this as a good thing and proper response to actions by others that have no impact on the US. If you're going to call for all this interventionism, you should at least know what you're calling for.
 
A brutal oppressive dictator, for sure. But terrorist? that's got to be stretching the term to unexplored limits...

Paul

He targets civilians for political gain.
 
Assad is a terrorist. There's no denying that - he gassed his own civilians to maintain political power.

So that makes Syria a state sponsor of terrorism - does it not?
 
For sure. But is that unusual for a 'brutal dictator'?

Paul

You think brutal dictator and terrorist are mutually exclusive?
 
Yeah and.....will they be running the Country afterwards?

Again, "so what," that there are good people in Syria. What is that suppose to mean in the Big Picture of things. Big frickken deal. Wow they have some good people like every country has. So what is that saying? Not a damn thing!

Their not in contention to take power to make change.

We get involved militarily, and it will wind up being US running the country. Which, we have no business doing.

Hide and watch.
 
Yeah, stopping multiple genocides, invasions of neighbors, the violation of 17 UNSCRs, institutional rape and the intentional starvation of hundreds of thousands of children is terrible! Now Iraq is a major receiver of international foreign aid and development projects. Oh noes!

Just a toss-in: Sanctions that the US fought for to be implemented killed 500,000 children (Iraq Sanctions Kill Children, U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com)

While Saddam was definitely a bad dude, we also did some dirt, whether intentionally or unintentionally.
 
All the talk of Syria has gotten me kind of lost. This is what I know. Correct me if I am wrong.

FACT:
Assad is a bad guy. His regime is responsible for the death of thousands of civilians, regardless of the chemical weapons evidence.

FACT:

Syrian rebels include Al Queda. They also are brutal, and are equally as likely to turn weapons against the United States.

FACT;

Russia only cares because of their military base, arms shipments, and Cold War-esque views of the West and "imperialism."

FACT:

Iran does not want to lose the route that they ship arms against Israel.


So? Anything wrong? I mean. As I see it I see it...there is no point because no side are good guys. The only thing that happens here is that we start a nice "liberal war" with an air campaign against Assad and blow a few things up, maybe change the location of the piles of rubble that the country is already in. The Russians come out looking like they support "stability" and we come out looking like the jerks. Again.

Now. My counter point to invasion is that we don't do a thing. The Russians take the hear for supplying arms, and maybe they get targeted for their intervention instead of us. Sound selfish? Sure. But sucks to the Russian government. Maybe they will get toppled again?

Exactly. Why is it OUR responsibility to get involved? It has nothing to do with us whatsoever!
 
Just a toss-in: Sanctions that the US fought for to be implemented killed 500,000 children (Iraq Sanctions Kill Children, U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com)

While Saddam was definitely a bad dude, we also did some dirt, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Sanctions never prohibited food or medicine. Plenty of hacks blame others through indirect and unprovable reasoning.

Fact: food that could feed 400k children was discovered, sold by Saddam, in surrounding countries.
 
You think brutal dictator and terrorist are mutually exclusive?

Eco, you really are stabbing all over the place, with this approach.

Paul
 
Back
Top Bottom